Ever since the dawn of democracy in Malawi in 1993, successive administrations have tended to sponsor some groups of people and employ other tactics to disrupt legally authorised protests, it has emerged.
In separate interviews yesterday, stakeholders, including demonstration organisers, also rued the proliferation of politically-backed civil society organisations (CSOs) serving interests of political parties under the guise of activism, a situation they say heightens tension and violence during protests.
From the days of United Democratic Front (UDF) between 1994 and 2004 to the era of Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) from 2005 to 2012 and then 2014 to 2020 as well as the Malawi Congress Party (MCP) tenure from 2020, the State is said to have been employing several means to suppress protests.
Peace and security expert Master Dicks Mfune said in an interview yesterday that Malawi was experiencing politically-induced protests that have been passed from one governing party to another.
He said: “The violence we are experiencing is what is termed as legacy of political violence. This has been there in the past dating back from the UDF regime who initiated this, DPP perfected it and MCP is simply implementing it.
“The young democrats during the UDF were feared by the security agents. The police were powerless during DPP, and we saw how the security agents have acted during the recent violent acts.”
Mfune said successive governments have justified their incapacity by informing the nation that they are investigating the violent acts.
He said: “We need to have a dialogue with all political parties, security agents, academia, all branches of government, and development partners.
“We also need truth, justice and reconciliation to bring the actors and players who are behind this together. Name those sponsoring the induced demonstrations and political violence in Malawi.”
Human rights lawyer Khwima Mchizi, who used to represent the Human Rights Defenders Coalition (HRDC) during the 2019-2020 post-election protests, recalled how government at that time and now tries to use all tactics to stop protests.
He said: “Remember the DPP regime went to court where they said anyone who wanted to protest should deposit K2 billion first, luckily this did not succeed in court. We have seen injunctions even during the July 20 2011 protests.
“Recently, we have seen new tactics where district commissioners and chief executive officers try to stop protests by simply telling organisers to postpone to later dates or even change routes for such demonstrations.”
During the DPP regime, activists such as Billy Mayaya were mercilessly attacked in Blantyre, surviving several cuts in the head, without police action.
Youth and Society (YAS) executive director Charles Kajoloweka, another organiser of demonstrations, said regimes do not support protests because they signal a vote of no confidence in the authority.
He said: “Authorities will always find ways of undermining those voices, pushing back the narrative of government failure and illegitimacy of government. Politicians are aware that protests can bring down the government.”
But HRDC chairperson Gift Trapence argued that the CSOs space is contaminated with many mercenary actors bankrolled by different politicians of the political divide with different interests.
Veteran rights activist Undule Mwakasungula, who was among leaders of the July 20 2011 anti-government protests, added that the violence or disagreements during protests is a result of pollution of the civic space.
He said: “The civic space has been hijacked, it is more commercialised, monetised than before. Protests have become business for the survival of certain groups, which need sanitising to bring order and discipline.”
Meanwhile, Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation executive director Michael Kaiyatsa has said what Malawi has been witnessing is a symptom of deep-rooted political intolerance, institutional weakness, and a lack of civic maturity.
Under Section 105(d) of the Police Act, law enforcers may order any person or group of persons interfering or attempting to interfere with an assembly or a demonstration to cease such conduct and to remain at a distance.
