Follow Us on Google
A new president has been sworn in to lead the people of Malawi in their quest to define and achieve their destiny. The most important fact about what has happened in Malawi is not just that Dr. Lazarus Chakwera is now the President of the republic, rather, it is about how he became President.
For those who still remember, Malawians went to the polls in 2019. It was keenly contested and the ruling DPP was pronounced winner. Like it is normal in Nigeria, the opposition approached the courts, alleging massive rigging. But, unlike Nigeria, Malawi’s highest court entered judgment and voided the election, thus, the re-run election that Chakwera won with 59 per cent of votes. With the judgment, Malawi entered the history books as the second African country where, in recent times, the judiciary was courageous enough to void a presidential election with the incumbent in office and order a re-run. The first was Kenya.
The interesting thing here is that Malawi is a poor landlocked country. Its population is about 20 million people (2020 estimate) with a nominal per capita of about $367 and a GDP of about $7,436 billion (2019 estimate) and 13 ethnic groups, with the Chewa making up about 35 per cent of the population. It is listed among world’s least developed countries with heavy dependence on foreign aid. It also operates a unicameral legislature. The most interesting thing about Malawi is that it is a country that has been on a steady walk to recover from the effects of long years of misrule by Dr. Hastings Kamuzu Banda, who ruled the country from 1964 to 1994. He was born in 1898 and died in 1997, three years after he lost power.
The re-run election in Malawi falsified the long-held view that poor African countries can hardly afford a democratic culture that mandates elections at intervals of four years. That argument had been used by sit-tight leaders in Africa to push forward the narrative that, except for countries like Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt and a few others that have the financial capacity to conduct periodic elections, others could hardly afford it and, therefore, would prefer longer presidential terms. In spite of that argument, Malawi has proved that it is not just about funds to conduct elections but the fear, by bad leaders, of being voted out by the people. Once leaders begin to suffer withdrawal syndrome, they begin to manufacture strategies to keep them perpetually in power. One of such strategies is the argument that elections are too expensive to be conducted periodically or to be re-run.
The new President, a Yao by tribe (third largest ethnic group, making up about 14 per cent of the population) posts some interesting credentials. He was president of Assemblies of God in Malawi from 1989 to May 2013 when he resigned to concentrate fully on politics. He qualified as a theologian and lectured at the Assemblies of God School of Theology, where he rose to become principal. He was also a teacher at the All Nations Theological Seminary in Malawi. He first indicated interest to run for the president of his party, Malawi Congress Party, in 2013 while still leading the Assemblies of God. He won at the convention and, thereafter, flew that party’s flag at the presidential election of 2014. When Malawians protested the outcome of the election, which they believed was rigged against him, Chakwera showed exemplary conduct when he asked his supporters to sheathe their swords, stay calm and wait for the next election. Many had expected him to push for violent revolt. He failed them. The remarkable thing about his resignation as leader of Assemblies of God was that many opposed the move. But he remained strong in his conviction that he could as well serve God from the political front. He later formed an alliance with another party whose leader, Saulos Chilima, is now his Vice President, to defeat the incumbent, Peter Mutharika, a lawyer, who served under his elder brother, President Bingu Wa Mutharika, as Minister of Education, Science and Technology, Minister for Justice and also Minister for Foreign Affairs.
The significance of this is not about Chakwera moving from the headship of the Assemblies of God to become President. It is rather about how a very poor and landlocked African country has steadily made sense out of democracy such that its judiciary could deliver justice without looking at the person or body language of the President. It is about a small and often ignored African country, which is progressively and practically teaching constitutionalism to the supposed giants. Between 1966 and 2020, Malawi has had five Presidents, with Chakwera entering office as the sixth. The country went through the brutal hands of Kamuzu Banda who, despite his foreign training as a medical doctor, became one of the most brutal dictators Africa produced.
Since he left office in 1994, the country has seen the leadership of Bakili Muluzi, Bingu wa Mutharika, Joyce Banda, Peter Mutharika and now Chakwera. None of the power transitions was messy and bloody. Both the candidates and their supporters always conducted themselves constitutionally. What this means is that, as small as Malawi is, it has become a giant in constitutionalism on the continent. It has also been able to, between 1994 and today, build an independent judiciary that is capable of building the country through judicial pronouncements that do not take into cognizance the tribal marks or religious affiliation of those who come before it seeking justice. That, to my mind, is a major leap forward for Malawi and its people. It is a major statement by the people which indicates that Malawi has come of age and is ready to play its role on the continent despite its place on the poverty index.
There are huge lessons here for Nigeria, the metaphorical giant, whose President, a victim and, later, a beneficiary, of parochial judicial pronouncements, suddenly realised its underdeveloped status. If Nigeria can no longer tap wisdom and sense from the developed countries of the world, it should, at least, look towards Malawi and borrow some courage in sensible electoral justice administration. That should be the foundation of its development.
Malawi is building institutions that drive development, independent judiciary and legislature. It is not building a President. The judiciary, as an institution, protects the Constitution of the country. That is what every serious-minded country does. Nigeria is not in the league of countries that could be counted as serious-minded. For this reason, justice administration wears a toga that first identifies ethnic belonging and religious affiliation before the merits. Isn’t that why major investors would rather go to places where the laws are enforced as they ought to be and also used to protect investments and people’s rights?
Like it is said, time waits for no one. Africa will not perpetually wait for Nigeria. The signals are there. Many African countries that hitherto waited for Nigeria to lead the way are no longer ready to stay down with Nigeria. Recently, francophone West Africa, tired of waiting on Nigeria to commence the single currency regime, broke loose and went their way with the policy. President Muhammadu Buhari took to Twitter to express his surprise that not even West African neighbours trust Nigeria to be serious anymore. He said: “It gives me an uneasy feeling that the UEMOA (French acronym for West African Monetary and Economic Union) Zone wishes to take up the Eco in replacement for its CFA Franc ahead of other ECOWAS member states. It’s a matter of concern that a people with whom we wish to go into a union are taking major steps without trusting us for discussion.”
That should be food for thought for Nigeria’s leaders.
