Constitution for a better Malawi

I was making the first draft of this article three weeks after the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) announced the name of the candidate who had won the presidential race. As yet, there was no political government, as opposed to a government of bureaucrats. The delay in the formation of a Cabinet has no precedent in the history of this country.

If we learn from experience, then we must revisit the democratic institutions that are in place. We must also be brave enough to recant some of the declarations our party spokespersons have been making lately.

First about Section 65, which forbids crossing of the floor. I did not expect someone from DPP to be included among those who want to punish those who cross the floor. It was such people who enabled the first DPP government to last the full term. The preceding UDF government had also been stabilised by the people who are now being demonised.

For the sake of a stable Parliament, we must grant one crossing to those who wish to help in stabilising a minority government. If the person who has crossed the floor changes his mind again during the same session then he or she must vacate their seats.

Because the electorate votes according to regional loyalties and none of our leaders has charisma enough to sweep votes all over the country, we must prepare ourselves for minority governments. Allowing the crossing is part of the solution for an unstable Parliament. No potential investor from abroad will come to a country where the party in power is actually ineffective within Parliament.

About recalling a non-performing MP the electorate itself every five years sacks those MPs who have underperformed. Recalling such a person within the five years will  involve the government in unnecessary expenses. Those who insist on the recall should consider the counter suggestion that the constituency should bear most of the expenses because a constituency problem is not a national but local problem. The expenses in by elections should be borne by those who have sponsored the recall.

We people of Malawi met in a well-represented convocations in 2007 and 2008 to draw a constitution which, among other things, made provision for rerun if no presidential candidate wins at least 50 percent of the votes. This constitution has never been brought to Parliament for ratification because the Cabinet of that time did not like its provisions.

In countries like Zimbabwe, Kenya, Senegal and Egypt , new constitutions with controversial clauses were subjected to a referendum. If the Cabinet and the Parliament do not like the revised constitution, the populous region to be giving the country a president almost indefinitely. This will create grumbling and resentment in other regions. Domination is not democracy.

President Peter Mutharika should not irrevocably stick to a 20 strong Cabinet otherwise he will deprive himself of the support his minority government needs. Muluzi, Bingu and Joyce Banda found they could not do with cabinets of less than 30 members.

He is right to worry about costs, but cuttings can be made in other parts of the State and Legislature. There should be a freeze on the pay and perks of MPs, sinecures paid to chiefs promoted into seniority should be revised. Do councillors really deserve K80 000, surely K50 000 would do? Try to persuade civil servants that an increase in the cost of living is not justification for salary increases for civil servants who are not facing starvation. Increments in public services should follow not precede palpable growth of the economy. If Malawians will not accept temporary sacrifices for the overall good, who will?

The dreams for the country about which we talk will remain mere dreams unless we realise that indeed fumbi ndiwe mwini (he that wants rewards must sweat for them and get covered by dust).

Appoint experts on cost-cutting, but do not hesitate to expand the Cabinet if this will stabilise your government, professor and President.