A group calling itself Citizens for Justice and Equity has said it will tomorrow submit a petition and proposed Presidential Age Limit Bill to Parliament ahead of possible tabling in the House next week Thursday during Private Members Day.
Leader of the group, Agape Khombe, said in an interview yesterday that they failed to submit the package on February 26 because it coincided with President Lazarus Chakwera’s question time in Parliament and a court case on the matter that has now been disposed of.
Apar t f rom proposing an amendment to Section 80 (6) (b) of the Constitution to bar any person above 80 years of age from contesting for the State presidency, Khombe said the new Bill also proposes reducing the minimum age from 35 to 30 years.
Said Khombe: “We expect the Bill to be tabled probably next week Thursday. We were also surprised that Thyolo Thava legislator Mary Navicha [Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)] went to court seeking an injunction even before the Bill was sent to Parliament.
“That delayed us as we wanted to see the end of that case. We have now been cleared to present the petition and proposed Bill on Friday, March 7 2024. We have been engaging youth and parties informing them of the details and essence of the Bill.”
In the said case, Navicha asked the High Court to grant an injunction restraining the Speaker of the National Assembly or her Deputies from presiding over the debate of the Bill, until a further order of the court or pending the final determination of the matter.
But Justice Kenyatta Nyirenda, in his ruling on February 27, said the case ought to have been brought by way of judicial review, and eventually, the action by the claimant was struck out for improper commencement.
Nyirenda ruled: “Having dismissed the main action, the application for an order of interlocutory injunction, being parasitic in nature [see the Siskina] (1979) A.C 21 and Channel Tunnel Group Limited v. Balfour Batty Construction Limited [1993] AC 334), has also to be dismissed and it is so dismissed.”
The DPP opposes this proposed law because it believes it targets its presumptive presidential candidate former president Peter Mutharika, who is aged 84.
Reacting to the latest twist in the controversial Bill, Leader of Opposition George Chaponda, who is also a member of DPP, argues that all this is targeting Mutharika, which the main opposition party will not accept.
Chaponda warned: “Let them bring the Bill if they want this country to go to hell. Very shortly we will be declared as a failed State, and yet we don’t put our priorities right. Why waste time on these things? The Constitution is very clear on the minimum and maximum age, why try to change?”
Leader of the House in Parliament, who is also Malawi Congress Par ty (MCP) secretary general Richard Chimwendo Banda, said his party does not support the Bill.
He said: “As MCP, we have never thought of that Bill, never discussed it [and] if it comes to Parliament, we will shoot it down.
“In fact, we will shoot down its motion even before the Bill is presented. We want to face Mutharika on the ballot because he created the mess the country finds itself in.”
United Democratic Front spokesperson Dyson Jangia said his party has not been approached on the Bill.
UTM spokesperson Felix Njawala said they will not be party to politics of expediency.
“UTM has not been in touch with this group. As a party we believe in a governance system that upholds democratic principles, which looks at inclusivity and will of the people. Any amendment has to be driven by the will of people, and not political expediency.
“As a party, we don’t think this Bill is a good idea, unless it is a national consensus through a referendum. Remember, this would be a very serious constitutional amendment.”
Earlier, Malawi Law Society president Patrick Mpaka said the Constitution in Section 87 addresses issues of capability of a President and Vice- President, as such there is no constitutional gap that the proposed amendment seeks to address.
Private practice lawyer Justin Dzonzi said the Bill would fall under Private Bill, where an individual or institution works behind the scenes and submits it to a legislator who can then present it in Parliament.
“If MPs will require more consultations, then they will let the Legal Affairs Committee do that, because in our jurisdiction, a list of consultations is not a requirement, we just need a memorandum explaining the essence of the Bill,” he explained.
In 2017, a report by the Special Law Commission on Electoral Reforms said it would be difficult to justify such an exclusion based on age where a potential candidate was, for all relevant purposes, fit and able to execute the functions of an elected office.
Further, the Constitutional Review Report of 2007 also looked at the matter and felt that this was a political issue best left to the political process.
