DPP constitution under scrutiny

Legal and political pundits have punched holes into former governing Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) constitution for placing so much power in its president Peter Mutharika who can choose to reshuffle positions in the national governing council (NGC) at will.

The sentiments follow Mutharika’s decision to use Article 10 (8) of the party’s constitution to move Kondwani Nankhumwa and Grezeldar Jeffrey from vice-president (South) and secretary general to being his adviser and vice-president (Centre), respectively.

The two and Cecilia Chazama, who was moved from director of women to Mutharika’s adviser, took the matter to the Supreme Court of Appeal, but they did not succeed.

Yesterday, University of Malawi law professor Garton Kamchedzera said he found it hard to believe that a democratic and progressive party had such a provision in its constitution.

He said: “It’s irreconcilable and very hard to make sense of a party in this era and under the constitution that Malawi has to have a political party that is going back to times of dictatorship.

“Unfortunately, the ultimate way is the court way. I do not totally agree with the decisions of the courts on the matter when they said this has to be sorted out within the party because we have a history that the party does not like following internal mechanisms of settling disputes.”

Kamchedzera also noted that Nankhumwa and his group should have challenged the constitutionality of the provision, and not necessarily the exercise of power provided under it.

He said the courts seemingly tired with DPP matters, an appeal to the full bench of the Supreme Court of Appeal would be an exercise in futility, suggesting arbitration.

“The applicants did not challenge the provision in their constitution, because this would have brought in issues of consistency and inconsistency and ask the court to interpret the constitution. But it appears they challenged exercise of the power and what the court are saying it that this power is provided for,” he added.

In an interview, private practice lawyer John-Gift Mwakhwawa said while the provision does not make sense if weighted against national democratic governance values, it was not wrong at party level.

“If you test it against the Malawi Constitution, it would not survive. What is allowed under their constitution is allowed within their party. If they were to transfer that to national governance, our Constitution will kick in and prevent that.

“Those opposing this have to campaign, lobby supporters, get the numbers to a convention and amend it, failing which, they have to abide by it or leave the party.”

On his part, human rights lawyer, Justin Dzonzi said the DPP constitution was a serious warning that a party cannot give birth to a democratic leadership at national level.

He further called for an amendment to Article 10 (8) of the DPP constitution, but urged against using the courts.

It’s perhaps a warning for those who either follow DPP or other political parties of what the party stands for,”  said Dzonzi.

Governance expert George Chaima said all problems DPP has been going through are due  to “too much power being given to Mutharika”.

“Mutharika will bring endless chaos in the party and the country. It is important that DPP constitution is thoroughly revised.”

Political pundit Ernest Thindwa agreed, saying Malawi’s political parties are subjected to personal whims of leaders thereby weakening parties as lynchpins between citizens and the government.

Article 10 (8) of the DPP constitution states that the president shall have the power to assign a member of the NGC to any public or political office and such a member shall cease to hold his or her original office.