[civsoc-mw] Economist magazine, on Mw election

[cammack at mweb.co.za]

Wigged men v Big Man
A court in Malawi tries to guarantee a fair election

After a rigged vote was annulled, President Peter Mutharika is trying to
cling to power

 <https://www.economist.com/middle-east-and-africa/> Middle East & Africa
<https://www.economist.com/printedition/2020-06-20> Jun 20th 2020 edition

  _____  

Jun 20th 2020 ECONOMIST MAG.

LILONGWE

*	 

GARTON KAMCHEDZERA is a man of reason. The professor of law at the
University of Malawi teaches contracts, trusts and constitutions. But over
the past year, as President Peter Mutharika has repeatedly been foiled in
his efforts to distort the electoral process, Mr Kamchedzera has wondered
whether there might be a higher power at work: God, perhaps, or "some kind
of deus ex machina".

It must feel that way for many in the southern African country of 18m
people. A general election in May 2019, which Mr Mutharika was at first
declared to have won, involved the liberal use of Tipp-Ex, a correction
fluid, to adjust voting tallies. It seemed that credible allegations of
rigging were not going to change the outcome. Observers from the European
Union noted an "unlevel playing field", but said the vote was "well managed,
inclusive, transparent and competitive".

Malawians, however, did not accept such whitewashing. Protesters took to the
streets. The two largest opposition parties, the Malawi Congress Party (MCP)
and the United Transformation Movement (UTM), went to the constitutional
court. Its judges refused parcels of cash that were allegedly offered by a
businessman linked to the president. On February 3rd the court cancelled the
presidential portion of the election and ordered a re-run.

It was only the second time in African history that judges have nullified a
vote. A fresh election is scheduled for June 23rd. Yet Malawi is far from
out of trouble. Much depends on what happens in the next few weeks. If
Malawi, one of the world's poorest countries, can have a fair election, it
will not just be good for Malawians. It will also undermine the argument,
used by autocrats everywhere, that covid-19 means democracy ought to wait.

Mr Mutharika has tried to hobble the process. He appealed to the Supreme
Court. He delayed appointing a new electoral commission until June 7th. He
dithered over the date for the election. And earlier this month his
government tried to force the chief justice to retire early.

But the president has been thwarted at every turn. Lawyers rallied around
the chief justice. The Supreme Court rejected the appeal. Opposition parties
got the election date onto the statute book, in part by defying
covid-related restrictions so they could pack the chamber with their MPs.

The opposition's determination makes sense. Mr Mutharika, who took office in
2014, is the fourth president since Hastings Banda's long authoritarian rule
ended in 1994. The current government has faced myriad allegations of
corruption. Fully 85% of Malawians feel the country is heading in the wrong
direction, according to a recent poll by the Institute of Public Opinion and
Research (IPOR).

The survey suggests that the candidate of the opposition alliance, Lazarus
Chakwera of the MCP, will win the re-run. Roughly half of respondents
supported him, compared with about a third for Mr Mutharika; the rest were
undecided or refused to say. Mr Chakwera, a pastor turned politician, bonded
with his running-mate, Saulos Chilima (of the UTM), as they sat together for
months in the constitutional court. Their support bases are complementary,
says Boniface Dulani, a political scientist at the University of Malawi,
Chancellor College. The MCP is strong in rural areas, especially in the
middle of the country; UTM does best among young urbanites.

But the duo are far from home and dry. There is still a dash to organise the
vote. Ballot papers are being printed in Dubai and are not expected to
arrive until June 19th. The timetable is tight. If there are procedural
hiccups, Mr Mutharika may use them as an excuse to get his supporters onto
the streets and to ask the courts for another nullification.

But that may not work. If the margin of victory is wide, the court will
probably forgive a snafu or two. The judges have not only upheld the
constitution in the past year. They have also reflected the mood of the
people: 80% of Malawians wanted a re-run, says IPOR.

Brave judges ensured that Malawi has a chance of a fair election. But they
can do only so much. "Malawians will need to stay vigilant," says Mr
Kamchedzera. │

This article appeared in the Middle East & Africa section of the print
edition under the headline "President v people"

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/pipermail/civsoc-mw/attachments/20200619/75e553e2/attachment.htm>