For a very long time there has been a mistaken belief in Malawi that people in positions of power, including the President cannot lose a court case.
This is probably due to fear-factor by the judges, that ruling against authority is likely to backfire on them by losing their jobs on flimsy grounds.
Meanwhile, what has happened in the courts after the May 21 2019 presidential election has been a wake-up call no one is above the law. To start with, the Judiciary scored points when the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) nullified the 2019 presidential election result.
The judges made history in Malawi and other countries in Africa where results of a presidential election have not been nullified after the winner has already been sworn in. In fact, in this country the President-elect is often quickly sworn-in so that he or she is protected by acquired immunity.
This myth was broken on February 3 2020, when the ConCourt judges nullified the 2019 presidential elections. Therefore, swearing in of a President within three days after the election results come out does not hold water. It is better to wait until all election queries have been settled. This would have avoided the embarrassment of having the results withdrawn.
The ConCourt judges also scored points by allegedly refusing a handsome. They made sure that there was a level playing field. This has been commendable, on the part of the judges.
Meanwhile, President Peter Mutharika and the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) have been losing case after case which they have taken to court, mostly with an aim of delaying the fresh election ordered by the ConCourt.
Having failed in courts to stop the fresh election, rumour is rife on social media that some government officials, in collaboration with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) are enticing boys and girls of between 11 and 14 years to get national identity cards (IDs) and register as voters.
It is wrong to have children below voting age  to come and vote. There are also claims that some unscrupulous people are collecting other people’s IDs or recording their numbers for unjustifiable reasons. Most likely this has to do with the earmarked fresh presidential election.
With due respect, those vying for the presidency should know better that a winning strategy has nothing to do with barbaric practices.
For President Mutharika, who has been in power for six years, what he claims to have achieved should naturally campaign for him. What he needs to do is to remind people about his delivered promises and people will accordingly vote for him if they are satisfied with what he has delivered.
In the same vein—of saying that no one is above the law— Malawians now know about their rights. Therefore, they find it unacceptable that government authorities should make decisions about them without first consulting them. The most recent example was the declared 21-day lockdown as a measure to control the spread of the coronavirus. People rejected it outright because they were not consulted. More importantly, people are poor and they live from hand-to-mouth; therefore, they cannot be barricaded in their houses without food which they get by going out to the markets and streets to sell various wares.
Authorities in this country should know that they are not above the law and cannot make decisions without consulting the masses. That is likely to backfire and trigger protests, Malawi is a democracy and not a dictatorship.