‘Regionalism still a factor in elections’

The elections results were announced on Friday, putting to rest tensions and speculations that Malawians went through for over a week after the polling day on May 20. As the new president, Peter Mutharika, takes over the country’s leadership, I talk to political analyst Joseph Chunga about the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) victory and other issues.

Q:

Two years ago, DPP was the most unpopular party. What, in two years, has changed to the effect that most Malawians can vote DPP back in power?

A:

I can explain it from three angles. First, is the spread and depth of DPP grass roots infrastructure. By 2009, DPP had stretched its tentacles across all corners of the country. It almost established itself as default party in many areas. Although by 2012, it had started destroying its positive image, these structures were only shaken but not dismantled. According to the Afrobarometer survey of 2012, after the death of Bingu, about 40 percent of Malawians indicated they did not support any party. This indicated that most previous supporters of DPP were still undecided. Thus, despite their disappointments with the state of affairs, no party had bought the hearts and minds of the disappointed DPP supporters.

Secondly, complementing the first point, alternative parties did not seize the advantage when DPP was shaking and probably at its weakest. People’s Party (PP) did not invest much in building from the grass roots, only enjoying the support of opportunists at national level. Similarly, Malawi Congress Party (MCP) and United Democratic Front (UDF) were still struggling with leadership succession. The MCP brand, under John Tembo, could not attract any support. So was the divided UDF. Although MCP resurrected as the ultimate challenger, it had a mountain to climb because its structures in the Southern and Northern regions had literally melted under the leadership of Tembo. Worse still, MCP had probably the least financed campaign among the top parties.

Thirdly, the fall of DPP in 2012 raised Malawians’ hopes that the economic crisis would go. In all fairness, PP leadership did its part in resolving the immediate concerns of Malawians economically and human rights wise. However, revelations of massive corruption and abuse of government resources, as well as general perception that President Joyce Banda lacked a vision for the country, dashed these hopes.

So in short, DPP has won not because it regained the popularity it enjoyed in 2009, but because it conserved its residual support, and alternative parties either did not inspire enough or had very little time and momentum to outplay the DPP. This is evident even in the margin of the win. In 2009, DPP won the presidency with 66 percent and got over 110 parliamentary seats. For the 2014, DPP could only manage 36 percent of the presidential votes and less than half of the 2009 MPs.

Q:

Based on DPP’s victory, what do you think is the character of the Malawian voter?

A:

Immediately, I thought of what exactly motivates the choice of a Malawians voter. One thing looks clear—Malawians cannot be bought by patronage transfers. Giving handouts does not guarantee politicians votes. If you consider the bags of maize, cows, houses and other materials the PP dished out, you would expect that the party would be people’s obvious choice. But that was not the case. The MCP, which was the closest contender against the DPP had publicly denounced handouts.

The results also suggest that the reputation of ability to delivery is an important consideration of the Malawian voter. During the first term and soon after 2009, DPP built itself a reputation of a party that could deliver public goods such as infrastructure, ensuring food security and economic growth. Much as it did some damage to this reputation by 2012, DPP campaign resonated well with Malawians who hoped for continuation of that legacy. It was easy to convince voters that the party will not repeat mistakes but build on its positives.

Furthermore, unfortunately, I think a leader’s place of origin remains a significant factor in voters’ choices. This pattern, which characterised elections between 1994 and 2004, seemed to have ceased in 2009 but it still remains. It is clear from the results that the majority in the Southern Region voted for DPP followed by parties with leaders from the region. UDF got most of its votes from the Eastern Region districts which have always been its ‘home’. The MCP resurgence was mainly due to Central Region support and partly the North where its running mate comes from. While DPP enjoyed the remnant support it had in 2009, it lost ground to MCP in the Centre.

Q: What governance challenges do you think DPP will meet and what would you suggest as solutions to them?

A:

The first challenge that the DPP government will have to face is to restore people’s trust in State institutions and public offices. The cashgate and other ‘-gates’ have eroded the people’s trust. If any democratic system is to work, trust of the people in their government is essential. The first step in dealing will this problem is for DPP to show clear condemnation of present and previous culprits. For example, prosecute all big fishes involved in Cashgate. Second, be as transparent as possible in government transaction.

Another challenge will be to erase the dirty part of DPP’s own legacy. By 2012, DPP had a face of a regime characterised by Executive arrogance, violation of human rights, and nepotism, among others. The current regime will need to show that it has changed and can do better. How the President treats critics and merit-based appointments to key public positions will be the first moves in resolving this.

Considering the outcome of the 2014 elections, there are real possibilities of Executive-Parliament gridlocks. With fewer than 50 MPs, it will be difficult to transact in Parliament if the opposition decides to block government business. The temptation will be high to coax some opposition MPs to join DPP as they did in 2005 but that will not be a solution. The key to resolving this is doing the right thing which will win the support of Malawians at large which will in turn force MPs to cooperate. Opposition MPs know from experience that standing in the way of people-centred government initiatives will cost them in the next election.

Q:

If you met President Mutharika, what would you advise him to help him avoid mistakes his brother did?

A:

First and foremost, he should surround himself with the right people. The choice of a team he picks to work with, starting with the Cabinet, will indicate what kind of a future he holds for Malawi and it will determine his success or failure as president. These should be people who are committed not to him but to their country. People who can help implement his vision but who can also positively challenge his ideas.

Secondly, I would tell him: “Mr President, be presidential”. He should cover his office with dignity and focus on real issues. He should, for example, never yell at journalists because of a newspaper cartoon, at activists or at anyone holding dissenting views.

Lastly, I would remind him that “only 36 percent voted for you as president which means 64 percent of Malawians think you are a wrong man for this high position—you have five years to prove them wrong and show what you are made of”. Delivery should be the ultimate benchmark of your time in office. Any other yard stick should be irrelevant; not even praises from your supporters.