[civsoc-mw] Women demo on equality.

[Charles Golomoti]

Hahahahaha! That is typical of you, Justice Dunstain. I knew you would come
back at me with a long and winded "fable"  (Mwaungulu publications) in
defense of women appointments in boards. I did the word count of your
"judgement" response: 369 words, and 2,026 characters (with spaces),
really?  Come on Dunstain, you can do better than that.

A few months ago, DPP thugs and Professor Getu (a Prof who has never
published in paper in her life!) were busy messing up our country in a big
way: plundering our agrobased economy in a barbaric fashion, with all top
jobs allocated to Efulefu (Chitsulo publications) material from the Belt,
and illegally importing zillion pockets of cement (or was it legal to you,
Dunstain?). You and Trevor never never complained. You and I know pretty
well that during the reign of the clueless Peter from Missouri, boards
had thugs of the caliber of Jomo. You guys still never raised a finger. But
suddenly you have become very wise and enlightened, joining the stampede to
defend women board appointments using the 40/40/20 formula. Am I missing
something in this picture?  What happened on your way to Damascus?

I wish the Tonse-A Team ignored all whining cry babies who are clamoring
for unfair and nonmeritorious appointments of women into our boards. It is
time to "clean house", you know. This is why I like the firm stand taken by
Gospel. Tisamangomvera zili zonse. Mvula ikagwa, kumachuluka zoliralira.
Consider this my very last posting on this thread.

CWG


On Sun, Oct 11, 2020 at 10:45 AM Dunstain Mwaungulu <
dfmwaungulu at googlemail.com> wrote:

> Bwana wanga, Golomoti, we are talking about law here. Law is not a fact.
> Whatctfw law now says is that there should be a minimum of each gender of
> 40%. Thst is not a factual matter. It is a legal factor.
>
> What are the facts? The female gender was 23% represented. The President
> has admitted this fact.
>
> His defence is that there were no women around to appoint from. This is an
> opinion rather than a fact. The fact is that universities in Malawi for the
> past 10 years have been producing more than 300 female graduates. Why 300
> because this is the total number the President has appointed to the board.
> So if the President had just looked at the graduate list of one year, there
> would be thousands of women graduating each year.  In one year, he would
> have a surplus in thousands of women. These are facts.
> Given these facts, we can say only two things about the ADVICE the
> President got from a) the VICE PRESIDENT, THE CABINET, THE SECRETARY TO THE
> PRESIDENT AND CABINET, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE LINE MINISTER, THE LINE PS
> AND THE TONSE ALLIANCE
> 1. He was properly advised and decided deliberately to ignore the advice.
> OR
> 2. He was not properly advised
>
> I know Lazarus personally, I reserve my opinion on what actually happened.
>
> But that goes to the quality of advice given. The President does not know
> all these people. And as the President said, some boards require certain
> profociencies. The only people who would have that information would be the
> PS. The PS shield have been the first person to apply the Act. And inform
> the President that the Act was considered.
>
> The President would have told the PS that it cannot be that I cannot find
> 150 women who are board material. That is a disgrace. For 50 years + of the
> existence of UNIMA, we have failed to produce 150 women? You are kidding me?
>
> More importantly, a good board is one that includes the lay and others
> unrelated to the area of operation or supportive services. The PS should
> have included these as women only to fulfil the 40/40/20 formula.
>
> These are facts, not fable.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://chambo3.sdnp.org.mw/pipermail/civsoc-mw/attachments/20201011/9a2efb26/attachment.htm>