Chakwera gets MLS praise on party funding Bill

Malawi Law Society has commended President Lazarus Chakwera for “providing real checks and balances” by not signing into law the Political Parties Act (Amendment) Bill to allow the State to fund all political parties represented in Parliament.

The funds, according to the Private Member’s Bill tabled by Zomba Ntonya parliamentarian Ned Poya (United Democratic Front) would have helped the political parties in their day-to-day activities, among others.

But Chakwera, according to a statement signed by presidential press secretary Anthony Kasunda, has rejected the amendment, saying it contravened provisions of Section 40(2) of the Constitution.

Reads the statement: “His Excellency Dr. Lazarus McCarthy Chakwera, President of the Republic of Malawi, in exercise of the powers vested in him by Section 89 of the Constitution, has dissented to Private Members Bill No. 1 of 2023: Political Parties [Amendment] for its non-compliance with Section 40(2) of the Constitution.”

The said section provides that such resources shall be given to any political party which has secured more than one-tenth of the national vote in elections to that Parliament.

The same is also affirmed by Section 21 (1) of the Political Parties Act, which Parliament wanted to change.

In an interview yesterday, MLS president Patrick Mpaka said this is the kind of scrutiny that they expect among the three branches of government.

He said: “On this occasion the President has provided appropriate and responsible checks on Parliament. This is how the three branches of government need to operate.

“We hope that our parliamentarians pick up the lesson to abide by the Constitution because public resources were no doubt spent on such an otherwise not worthwhile exercise.”

In a separate interview, Centre for Multiparty Democracy executive director Kizito Tenthani said the proper understanding of this is that the President has “withheld his consent” and the reason is that the amendment is “inconsistent” with Section 40 (2) of the Constitution.

He said: “So, what the President has done is commendable and should have been expected. Even if he had assented to the amendment, it could have been challenged in court, based on the inconsistency, and it could not stand.

“As far as I am aware, the initial plan was to amend Section 40 (2) of the Constitution. But it was noted that the part of the Constitution that was targeted was one of those that are entrenched, i.e. you require a referendum to amend it.”

However, Tenthani observed that since the Political Parties Act of 2018 has the same clause as in the Constitution, Parliament, in its wisdom thought it could go around the Constitution by amending the Act.

“So, the action of the President does not necessarily mean that he is against the spirit of the amendment. Rather, he is protecting the sanctity of the Constitution, which is his primary duty,” he said.

Centre for Social Accountability and Transparency executive director Willy Kambwandira also commended the President and cautioned legislators against rushing to amend laws without proper scrutiny.

He said: “This is a message to our members of Parliament to be very serious when discussing matters of national importance. It was clear that this was against the Constitution, but they went ahead to do whatever they wanted.

“As they go to Parliament this February for the budget session, they need to be scrutinising everything that comes their way, and I think they are the only team in the sub-Saharan Africa region who simply pass everything. They need to get serious.”

Poya said he was in a meeting when contacted yesterday.

The President has, however, assented to the Ombudsman (Amendment), Electronic Transactions and Cyber Security (Amendment), Data Protection, Persons with Disabilities and Tobacco Industry Bills.

Others are Investment and Export Promotion, International Arbitration, Special Economic Zones and Appropriation (Amendment) Bills.