** Please visit our website: http://www.africanassociation.org **
Quite right, Wilmot. The judiciary does give a lot of hope in Malawi. The
way things go, this whole impeachment process will most likely involve a
whole lot of injunctions against this and that and so on. Everyone goes to
the judiciary. It has the final say in most matters and it has shown a lot
of intergrity. In fact, four years ago, parliament tried to "impeach"
judges who were deemed to be "too independent" because they did not agree
with the executive all the time.
Dean
--- "Wilmot B. Valhmu" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks, Dean, for the clarifications. I am a big fan of Malawi, for
> several reasons, some of which are obvious. But this is one of the
> biggies: The country has something my home country Liberia lacks, i.e.,
> the rule of law. The Malawian respect for the judiciary is impressive
> and unparalleled in a lot of Africa. I hate to see that get corrupted.
> So, I am proud that Bingu is standing up to those who would subvert good
> governance.
>
> Take care, everybody!
>
> - Wilmot
>
>
> Dean Makuluni <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> ** Please visit our website: http://www.africanassociation.org **
>
> Peter and Wilmot:
>
> You force my hand. Let me commend you, Wilmot, for your explanations,
> which are right on the mark.
>
> Regarding the questions of constitutionalism, the presidency, and
> elections, please view the Malawi constitution at the following url:
> http://www.sdnp.org.mw/constitut/brfindx.html
> As you will note from the document (especially Chapter VIII), the
> executive is independent from other branches of government (legislature
> and judiciary) in a manner similar to that provided for in the US
> constitution. There is no requirement in the constitution that the
> president should belong to any political party represented in parliament
> or in existence in the country. As long as the individual, member of a
> party or not, meets the requirements to run and be elected president,
> s/he
> can serve as president.
>
> Although parliamentary and presidential elections do take place at the
> same time, they are in reality two different elections. As is evident
> from
> last year's election, the party which won the largest number of seats in
> the parliamentary elections is not the same as the party to which the
> current president originally belonged. Sure, it is frustrating to those
> who sponsored President wa Mutharika in last year's election that he
> resigned from their party; but the fact remains that he has not broken
> any
> laws of Malawi by ditching the party that sponsored him to the
> presidency.
> This is a party issue.
>
> You may wish to consider that this is not the first time that this sort
> of
> oddity has happened on the Malawi political scene. Several months before
> last year's elections (elections were in May), the then Vice President,
> Justin Malewezi, announced his resignation from the same United
> Democratic
> Front of Bakili Muluzi. That resignation estranged Malewezi from Bakili
> Muluzi, with whom he had run for executive office; but it did not affect
> Malewezi's standing as vice president of the republic. Unlike the South
> African situation, where the president has the power to fire his vice
> president, the Malawi constitution did not allow the Malawi president to
> do anything to his own vice president for absconding from the party to
> which they had both belonged. In a similar manner, the consitution does
> not provide any power to anyone to fire a president who absconds from
> his
> own party.
>
> In addition to politicians concerns about their status under wa
> Mutharika's drive against corruption, this is why there is a push to
> impeach wa Mutharika among parliamentarians. The Chakuwamba issue is a
> side show. Chakuamba has been in politics for a long time. He announced
> last year that he was retiring from the politics. Next thing he is in
> cabinet, and then out of cabinet. His remarks are the words of a person
> who is bitter for not being given more of the share of the national
> cake.
> Although disrespectful against the president, Chakuambas' remarks do not
> amount to treasonous utterances. No judge in Malawi will let any such
> flimsy charges stand. As we say in Malawi, this case will end in
> "washauti"--washout. No charges, no case. The real issue is that
> political
> parties want to achieve what the constitution does not allow through
> parliament. They threaten to impeach the president all the time. But
> this
> is also a move that is not entirely promising. The problem here comes
> about because although the constitution originally provided for the
> creation of a senate (consider the case in the USA, where congress lays
> charges against a president, but the trial is conducted by the senate);
> in
> reality, this idea was never implemented. What this means is that the
> same
> people who are accusing the president of violating the tenets of the
> constitution are also the ones who will stand in judgment and pass
> sentence (accuser, judge, jury, jailor). Unless, of course, a method is
> found to avoid such a kangaroo court. The parliamentarians know that the
> judicial branch of government takes matters of "natural justice"
> seriously
> and would not condone impeachment of the president on mere political
> grounds.
>
> I hope this helps to clarify issues.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dean
>
> --- PETER W VAKUNTA wrote:
>
> > ** Please visit our website: http://www.africanassociation.org **
> >
> > Thanks again Wilmot. Let's wait for DEAN's response.
> >
> > PETER W.VAKUNTA
> > DEPARTMENT OF FRENCH AND ITALIAN
> > UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON
> > 602 VAN HISE HALL
> > 1220 LINDEN DRIVE
> > MADISON WI 53706-1525
> > U.S.A
> > Office 608 262 4067
> > Home 608 422 6089
> > Cell 608 381 0407
> >
> > "The heart of a fool is in his mouth, but the mouth of the wise man is
> > in his heart."
> > BENJAMIN FRANKLIN
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Wilmot B. Valhmu"
> > Date: Thursday, September 15, 2005 12:54 pm
> > Subject: Re: MALAWI AGAIN!!
> >
> > > Peter,
> > >
> > > Before moving further, let me state for the record that I'm a
> > > Bingu fan. Having said that, let me also state that my admission
> > > should not be taken to mean that I'm necessarily biased.
> > >
> > > Again, this is what I know of the situation in Malawi: Bingu wa
> > > Mutharika was hand-picked by his predecessor to be the
> > > presidential candidate of the UDF Party. Inherent in that
> > > arrangement was the implication that Bingu would walk the party
> > > line. It is common knowledge that former president Bakili Muluzi
> > > believes that the party is greater than the administration
> > > ("government", as people are fond of saying in Malawi). Bingu and
> > > Mr. Muluzi have argued this back and forth, as press reports have
> > > borne out.
> > >
> > > Since Mr. Muluzi created for himself the position of party
> > > chairman in UDF upon his exit from government and has stated that
> > > the party is greater than the administration, it follows that he
> > > intended to rule Malawi by proxy. Thus, when his supposed devotee
> > > turned the table and put into place a strict policy against
> > > corruption, almost all hell broke loose. Former government
> > > officials who feared being caught in the dragnet became overnight
> > > critics of the administration.
> > >
> > > When Bingu distanced himself further from UDF and abandoned some
> > > of Muluzi's practices, he was warned by Muluzi that an
> > > administration cannot survive alienation from the party that
> > > brought it into power.
> > >
> > > If you care about sovereignty of the state, then you will agree
> > > that Bingu is right in asserting that the government is above the
> > > party and not the other way around. You will also agree that the
> > > president should render his constitutional duties without a puppet
> > > master in the background pulling strings.
> > >
> > > Therein lies the nexus of the current political struggles in Malawi.
> > >
> > > Again, I defer to Professor Makuluni and others who are more
> > > knowledgeable about Malawi than I am. Their input would be
> > > greatly appreciated.
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > >
> > > - Wilmot
> > >
> > >
> > > PETER W VAKUNTA wrote:
> > > ** Please visit our website: http://www.africanassociation.org **
> > >
> > > Thanks for your feedback Wilnot. If the president absconded from the
> > > party that catapulted him into the helm in Malawi, that in itself
> > > is a
> > > breach of trust. Again I go back to technicalities: What does the
> > > MALAWIAN constitution say on issues like these? What about the
> > > constitution of the ruling party? What are the stipulations in these
> > > documents? I know that some of our constitutions in Africa are not
> > > worthier that the sheets of paper on which they are writtten. BUT,
> > > there comes a time in the life of a nation when the truth has to be
> > > faced for better or for worse.
> > > Can any Malawian brother or sister unravel this conundrum, please.
> > > Have a good one!
> > >
> > > PETER W.VAKUNTA
> > > DEPARTMENT OF FRENCH AND ITALIAN
> > > UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON
> > > 602 VAN HISE HALL
> > > 1220 LINDEN DRIVE
> > > MADISON WI 53706-1525
> > > U.S.A
> > > Office 608 262 4067
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
http://mail.yahoo.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, visit:
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/aam.html
AAM Website: http://www.africanassociation.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
