Constitutional changes are important

In the wake of the disputed May 2014 Tripartite Elections, which ushered in a president with a minority vote, there has been a renewed clarion call from the opposition and civil society for the president to be elected by 50 percent plus one of votes cast. This position is not new.

In 2005 there was a constitutional conference, sponsored by Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (Osisa), to discuss a number of changes to the Constitution.

One of the proposed amendments was that the president should be elected by 50 percent plus one of the total votes cast.

If no candidate amasses the 50 percent plus one, fresh elections should be held within 30 days.

In the re-run, only the candidate who received the most number of votes and the one who came second should compete. The rest of the candidates are automatically eliminated.

This constitutional provision is common in many jurisdictions such as Kenya and Ghana.

It is intended to ensure that the president is elected by the majority of the electorate and not a minority.

For example, in the 2008 election, Ghana had a run-off between Nana Akufo-Addo and Johan Atta Mills after the first election could not produce a winner as the eight candidates fell short of the required 50 percent.

Since the first multi-party elections in 1994, it is only Bingu wa Mutharika who won an election by a landslide with 66.17 percent in 2009 and Muluzi went through 52.38 percent in 1999. In 1994 Muluzi won with 47.30 percent while current President Peter Mutharika won with 36 percent.

Both Bingu and Joyce Banda ignored the proposed constitutional amendments and did not push them to Parliament for debate.

However, the provision to have a presidential candidate elected by 50 percent plus one of the total votes cast is necessary in Malawi because of the many presidential candidates vying for political office and the regional nature of Malawian politics.

The dangers of being elected by a minority vote are obvious. Presidents who are elected by a minority vote do not lead effectively. They panic and spend most of their time consolidating political power instead of concentrating on development and governance.

This characterised the leadership of Muluzi and Bingu during their first terms in office. They spent most of their time politicking and boosting their parliamentary numbers either by entering into coalitions with other parties or enticing independent or opposition MPs to defect to their parties or they surrounded themselves with homeboys. The saddest part of the whole saga is that they were using public resources for personal gain.

It is well known that presidential candidates draw massive support from their respective regions. This means they do not command nationwide support.

A president who is voted by a minority vote does not enjoy the support of the people nationwide and it is tantamount to a vote of no confidence. Hence, there is need for presidents who enjoy the support of the majority of Malawians.

The major one is that the president does not trust people from other regions who did not vote for him. This is reflected in the appointment of ministers, advisers and other public appointments.

He or she is surrounded by people he or she can trust and this means the majority of the people are from his or her own region. We have seen a barrage of criticism levelled at President Peter Mutharika for appointing 75 percent of ministers from the South in the 20-member Cabinet.

Equally, the majority of advisers, press officers, personal assistants and others are from the South. Such overt regional appointments not only polarises the society, but also alienates certain groups who feel not part of the political system. Moreover, development is bound to suffer.

Since important government policies and development initiatives are made at Cabinet level, it means Cabinet will not be able to know the development priorities of other regions because they do not have an effective voice. Can a Cabinet dominated by one region be able to know the needs and problems of other regions?

The power to change the Constitution rests with Parliament. If the Executive is not keen to take the initiative to amend the Constitution, individual MPs can table a private member’s bill and lobby other members to support the motion. It is high time MPs started using their power to amend laws for benefit of all Malawians.

A Constitution is a living document. It cannot remain static for a long time. It needs to be changed to suit various circumstances. A provision requiring that a president should win with 50 percent plus one of the votes cast is one of them.