Wednesday, 06 May 2009
By Tom Likambale
Background
In Malawi, little was known of Bingu wa Mutharika before President Bakili Muluzi appointed him to be Deputy Governor of the Reserve Bank in or around the year 2000, and to cabinet as Muluzi’s Minister of Economic Planning in 2002. Before then, Mutharika had attended a UDF convention, bidding to become its leader and losing to Muluzi around 1992. At that time, Mutharika was Secretary General of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa [COMESA], a position to which he had been appointed.
It is not public knowledge how Mutharika came to get such an [COMESA] appointment since he was, at the time of the appointment in 1991, living in exile, allegedly having fled the Kamuzu Banda dictatorship in Malawi. One assumes that he would not have been appointed to this position by a government he had fled into exile from. Unsubstantiated reports suggest that he had Zambian citizenship at the time and was given that aapointment under the auspices of the Zambian Government. Hopefully, one day Mutharika himself will shed light publicly on this.
Suffice it to say that in between his stint at COMESA, a stint which ended in ignominy for him as explained below, and his appointment to the Reserve Bank Deputy Governorship by Muluzi, the man who was born Brightson Webster Ryson Thomu in Thyolo on February 24, 1934, returned to Malawi and formed his own political party, the United Party [UP]. He contested for the state presidency in the general elections of 1999 under the banner of that party and polled last among all candidates, garnering less than 1% of total votes cast. Muluzi won re-election to a second term in that election.
Mutharika received a Masters degree in Economics at Delhi University in India and a Ph.D award from Pacific Western University in Los Angeles, United States of America. Pacific Western University has been widely criticised for being an institution which routinely awards degrees, not for course or research work done, but in exchange for money. Nevertheless, Mutharika was able to get a job with the United Nations in 1978.
Perhaps a substantive glimpse into Mutharika’s personality and modus operandi in a responsible position can be located in a “Report of the Special Committee of Eminent Persons on the operations of COMESA, 1992 To-Date” which was presented to the [COMESA] Council of Ministers on March 4th, 1997, at Lusaka in Zambia. As a result of that report, Mutharika was fired as COMESA’s Secretary General.
Some of the findings of that report are instructive and below is an excerpted version:
1.5.1 (b) … The Secretary General has used COMESA funds to finance missions which cannot be confirmed to be official and beneficial to COMESA. The Secretary General has also used COMESA resources for personal activities.
1.5.2 (c) The internal audit, which was the only effective control instrument has been scrapped by the Secretary General without the knowledge of the Council; and
(d) The scope of work of the external auditors as evidenced in the Audit contract has been severely restricted by the Secretary General contrary to the provisions of the Treaty.
1.5.4 (a) There is no formal organisation structure at the Secretariat. The absence of a well-thought-out and approved organisation structure has enabled the Secretary General to:
* abolish some departments and redesign others;
* scrap internal audit of the organisation;
* fill established positions with consultants; and
misplace and misallocate personnel without matching ability with the task to be accomplished
(b ) The relationship between the Secretary General and COMESA institutions is strained because of the Secretary General’s demeanor and management style. His desire to have a domineering role in the management of these institutions is one of the causes of the strain. The Secretary General has, as a result, failed to conclude cooperation agreements with these institutions as required by the treaty. He has used funds of some institutions contrary to laid down rules and regulations of the institution(s)
(C) The Secretary General has failed to develop an effective and beneficial working relationship with Member States by arrogating himself a status equivalent to Heads of State and Government thereby treating Ministers and officials responsible for COMESA Affairs as inferior to him.
1.5.5 There is no mechanism in place to ensure the effective implementation of the decisions of the policy organs. Since 1992, several major decisions remain unimplemented because of the Secretary General’s failure to find time to address the critical areas that need attention. …..
1.6 Recommendations
At present, the Treaty provisions enable the Secretary General to report to both the Authority and the Council of Ministers. The dual reporting relationship has enabled the Secretary General to, not only ignore, but also bypass the Council on major decisions……
There is no formal accounting system incorporating effective internal controls. As a result, the Secretary General has been able to abuse his power by misusing resources of the institution ….
By limiting external audit to finances from Member States to the exclusion of other resources available to COMESA, the Secretary General has effectively curtailed the role of external auditors as spelt out in the Treaty …….
In view of the management style pursued by the Secretary General, his inability to mould and motivate a dedicated management team, his fragrant and frequent breaches of the provisions of the Treaty, the Staff and Financial Rules and Regulations, his misuse of funds and office and in view of the spite demonstrated to the decisions of the Council, the breach of the conditions of his compulsory leave, the Committee recommends that the services of the Secretary General be terminated forthwith as he lacks vision to take COMESA in the next century.
In its concluding chapter, the report states (excerpts)
6.1 (a) Observations
... We confirm that administrative and financial management of COMESA began to deteriorate with the arrival of the incumbent Secretary General. There is ample evidence of a vibrant institution and a team of professional and dedicated staff prior to his appointment. The vibrancy, level of professionalism and dedication have since continued to wane to the detriment of the aims and objectives of COMESA.
His flagrant refusal to honour invitation to appear before the Committee and his breach of the conditions set out in a letter sending him on leave smacks of obstinacy and unparalleled arrogance reminiscent of his bloated belief that he is at the level of Heads of State and Government and therefore not subject to the decisions of the Council whose Ministers he considers inferior to him. It is a mark of contempt and disrespect to the Committee’s appointing authority.
(b) Dr Mutharika avers in his press reports dated 22nd January 1997 that as an appointee of the Authority, the Council has no mandate to act the way it did, and that he is not subject to the Staff Rules and Regulations.
We disagree with both propositions. He was appointed by the Authority as the chief executive officer of COMESA. He is subject to the policy directions and decisions of the Council in the exercise of its mandate under Article 9 (2) (a), (c) and (d) of the Treaty. He is bound by the decisions of the Council in accordance with Articles 9 (3) and 10 (4) of the Treaty.
(c) We have come across documents and directives which the Secretary General has issued denying application of the staff rules and regulations to him. We disagree with this contention and find that paragraph 4 of his letter of appointment as Secretary General of the PTA dated 3rd May 1990 expressly subjects him to the Staff Rules and Regulations of the PTA. We have noted that no letter appointing him as COMESA Secretary General has been made available to us. In its absence, we find that the original letter of appointment and his being subject to COMESA staff rules and regulations are proper and legal (....) Articles 189 (2) and (4) of the COMESA Treaty which validate contractual obligations made under PTA as if they were made under COMESA and specifically provides that:
“References to the Preferential Trade Area in any law or document shall on and after the appointed day be continued as references to the Common Market.” Article 189 (1) of COMESA Treaty defines “the appointed day” as the day upon the entry into force of the COMESA Treaty. This was on 8th December 1994. We are satisfied that Dr Mutharika’s original letter of appointment as PTA’s Secretary General which subjected him to the Staff Rules and Regulations of the PTA remains valid and legal in so far as COMESA is concerned by virtue of Article 189 (2) and (4) as aforesaid. .........
The Committee has noted glaring instances of mismanagement of the resources of COMESA by the Secretary General. There is outright misuse of funds on unproductive, irrelevant and unrelated mission to COMESA’s aims and objectives. To facilitate such misuse, the Secretary General has dispensed with the internal audit section of the organisation and emasculated the external audit by illegally restricting its audit mandate. Substantial funds of the institution have been used to finance travel, accommodation and other expenses of the Secretary General’s missions. No reports exist to show the net benefit of these missions to COMESA. On the contrary, evidence exists that the bulk of the missions are to Malawi (his home) and Zimbabwe where his wife resides on their farm. COMESA funds these missions, which we have established are primarily private in nature.
..... We have found that no system of internal controls exists at COMESA Secretariat. As a result, there are no operations manuals necessary for the effective financial and budgetary controls. Coupled with the absence of internal audit and ineffective and restricted external audit the Secretary General has misused the finances of COMESA with impunity. He has paid himself questionable expenses, he has given himself loans and advances, he has failed to retire imprest in time or at all despite the express provisions of the rules and regulations as they stand today.
Efficiency in the management and utilization of COMESA resources is lacking. The emphasis in resource utilization has shifted from COMESA’s core mission of project identification, appraisal and implementation to production of abstract reports and personal missions of the Secretary General. The styles of management pursued by the Secretary General in the absence of a clear development strategy do not lend themselves to an efficient resource management system.
There is no approved organisation structure for the institution. Coupled with the dictatorial and intolerant administrative style of the Secretary General, staff has been frustrated to the point of apathy.
Key professionals have resigned as a result. Staff morale is at the lowest ebb to the extent that no meaningful work can be expected of them. Staff rules and regulations have been breached by the Secretary General with impunity and hefty rewards have been made to those prepared to tow his line. In addition to the foregoing, the Council decision restricting the tenure of services of management and professional staff to a two-year contract subject to a maximum of twelve years has created a feeling of insecurity among staff. The over centralization of decision making, authority and financial resource utilization in the secretary General’s office have further compounded the problems of the institution.
We consider such state of affairs inappropriate for the effective administration and management of an international organisation.
The relations between COMESA and its institutions, and Member States are restrained because of the demeanor and arrogance of the Secretary General. He has created more misunderstanding and hatred in the institution and member States than he has made friends.
The Secretary General has usurped the power of the Council by prescribing travel allowances which have primarily benefited him contrary to the provisions of staff and financial rules and regulations. He has misused the Council by discreetly introducing amendments to the staff rules as to the implications of the amendments. We have observed that the amendments were designed to cede power from the Council to himself and were also an attempt to retroactively validate the illegal increases he ordered. We have noted that his attention had been drawn to the illegality and he ignored the advice.
The bulk of policy decisions made by the Authority and the Council have not been implemented because they have received the Secretary General’s low priority. In addition he is hardly available to put in motion machinery for implementation. Available statistics show that on the average, the Secretary General is available in the office for only 7 days in any given month. .....
The secretary General upon assuming office stated that the Monetary Harmonization Programme was over ambitious and un-implementable. As a result, he launched a crusade against the programme already adopted by the authority.
The unfortunate and unjustifiable non implementation of this programme and the non-staffing of the division which made it non functional constituted the break of linkage which was to exist between the Secretary General and other COMESA institutions.
The above situation has seriously impeded the attainment of the objectives of the COMESA Monetary and Financial Cooperation Committee and the Committee of COMESA Board of Governors.
Recommendations....
....... in view of the management style pursued by the Secretary General, his inability to mould and motivate a dedicated management team, his flagrant and frequent breaches of the provisions of the Treaty, the Staff and Financial Rules and Regulations, his misuse of funds and office and in view of the spite demonstrated to the decisions of the Council and the breach of the conditions of the compulsory leave, the Committee recommends that the services of the Secretary General be terminated forthwith as he lacks vision to take COMESA in the next century.
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Mtumodzi trashes Nyasa Times
In a recent interview with Voice of America (VOA), Chikumbutso Mtumodzi, spokesman for President Mutharika Mtumodzi described Nyasa Times as a bogus publication that should not be believed.
He went on to say , "Nyasa Times is not respected in Malawi; Nyasa Times is associated with fabrication; Nyasa Times is associated with imagination by a few who don't believe that they are going lose. As simple as that and Voice of America should at least desist or refrain from using Nyasa Times as a source of information,".
Complete interview available on:
http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2009-05-12-voa3.cfm
He went on to say , "Nyasa Times is not respected in Malawi; Nyasa Times is associated with fabrication; Nyasa Times is associated with imagination by a few who don't believe that they are going lose. As simple as that and Voice of America should at least desist or refrain from using Nyasa Times as a source of information,".
Complete interview available on:
http://www.voanews.com/english/Africa/2009-05-12-voa3.cfm
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
President who lost control of his puppet
Came across this interesting article on the net:
http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090317/FOREIGN/537155120/1017/ART
Well worth a read.
Some extracts:
“We felt very, very betrayed,” Mr Muluzi insisted, referring to the successor he hand-picked as head of state and whom he is now trying to dislodge in elections in two months’ time.
The bitter struggle for power in Malawi, a small country at the southern end of Africa’s Rift Valley, is a potential object lesson for those leaders, such as Vladimir Putin in Russia, who hope to rule through proxies after their allotted terms are up.
Since his election in 2004, Mr wa Mutharika has proved anything but pliable, breaking away from the UDF to form his own party, sidelining Mr Muluzi’s supporters, and having his predecessor arrested for corruption.
“It’s the usual African politics when you find someone strong and popular,” he said. “Banda arrested me seven times; I won freedom for our people and the same thing is repeating. It’s usual in Africa. In 2004 this president actually won because I was there and assisting him; that’s why they are fighting me.”
The meaning of assisting him may be explained by Dumbo Lemani, a late confidant of Mr Muluzi, who was reported to have claimed that the party rigged the election in Mr wa Mutharika’s favour.
Mr Muluzi, 60, said he felt “very betrayed” by the incumbent’s split from the UDF, and it was the main reason for his attempting a comeback. “I believe in democracy. This man is taking us back to dictatorship. It’s terrible here in terms of human rights. I fought for pluralism in this country. Bingu is wanting to bring us back to a one party state. I’m not going to allow that.”
Humphrey Mvura, his party spokesman, went further.
“As the president if he wanted to plunder some aspects of the economy, he would have done a lot more than what’s being talked about,” he said.
“They see it coming from Morocco, they think this must be black money; they see it coming from Rwanda or from a bank in China or Taiwan, they think it must be black money.
“It’s normal, if you are a sitting president you ask your colleagues, ‘Look, I’m going through an election, can you assist me?’ It came straight from abroad into his account, there were no transfers from the reserve bank, no transfers from any government account.”
Behind the protestations it was an extraordinary admission, even though foreign funding of political parties is legal in Malawi, and Mr Mvura also insisted that having been elected on a UDF platform, the party could take credit for Mr wa Mutharika’s reforms.
In terms of electoral support Malawi is regionally divided, with Mr Muluzi’s backers – to whom he has a habit of tossing 50-kwacha notes (Dh1) – concentrated in the south, and confident of victory.
“We love Muluzi because he is a good leader,” said Barnett Nyumbu, 34, a driver, outside the compound.
But Nandini Patel, chairman of the Institute for Political Interaction, a think tank, …… expects Mr wa Mutharika, who has impressed donors since taking office, to win the poll she expressed deep concerns about him, pointing out he had given himself the title of Ngwazi, or chief of chiefs, an honour previously claimed by Banda.
“This is a dictator in the making,” she said, pointing out that relatives of hers have been threatened with consequences to their businesses because of her political activities.
“I was scared of Muluzi; I’m scared of Bingu. I never met Banda, but it’s no different, it’s the same. They all come from the same culture.”
http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090317/FOREIGN/537155120/1017/ART
Well worth a read.
Some extracts:
“We felt very, very betrayed,” Mr Muluzi insisted, referring to the successor he hand-picked as head of state and whom he is now trying to dislodge in elections in two months’ time.
The bitter struggle for power in Malawi, a small country at the southern end of Africa’s Rift Valley, is a potential object lesson for those leaders, such as Vladimir Putin in Russia, who hope to rule through proxies after their allotted terms are up.
Since his election in 2004, Mr wa Mutharika has proved anything but pliable, breaking away from the UDF to form his own party, sidelining Mr Muluzi’s supporters, and having his predecessor arrested for corruption.
“It’s the usual African politics when you find someone strong and popular,” he said. “Banda arrested me seven times; I won freedom for our people and the same thing is repeating. It’s usual in Africa. In 2004 this president actually won because I was there and assisting him; that’s why they are fighting me.”
The meaning of assisting him may be explained by Dumbo Lemani, a late confidant of Mr Muluzi, who was reported to have claimed that the party rigged the election in Mr wa Mutharika’s favour.
Mr Muluzi, 60, said he felt “very betrayed” by the incumbent’s split from the UDF, and it was the main reason for his attempting a comeback. “I believe in democracy. This man is taking us back to dictatorship. It’s terrible here in terms of human rights. I fought for pluralism in this country. Bingu is wanting to bring us back to a one party state. I’m not going to allow that.”
Humphrey Mvura, his party spokesman, went further.
“As the president if he wanted to plunder some aspects of the economy, he would have done a lot more than what’s being talked about,” he said.
“They see it coming from Morocco, they think this must be black money; they see it coming from Rwanda or from a bank in China or Taiwan, they think it must be black money.
“It’s normal, if you are a sitting president you ask your colleagues, ‘Look, I’m going through an election, can you assist me?’ It came straight from abroad into his account, there were no transfers from the reserve bank, no transfers from any government account.”
Behind the protestations it was an extraordinary admission, even though foreign funding of political parties is legal in Malawi, and Mr Mvura also insisted that having been elected on a UDF platform, the party could take credit for Mr wa Mutharika’s reforms.
In terms of electoral support Malawi is regionally divided, with Mr Muluzi’s backers – to whom he has a habit of tossing 50-kwacha notes (Dh1) – concentrated in the south, and confident of victory.
“We love Muluzi because he is a good leader,” said Barnett Nyumbu, 34, a driver, outside the compound.
But Nandini Patel, chairman of the Institute for Political Interaction, a think tank, …… expects Mr wa Mutharika, who has impressed donors since taking office, to win the poll she expressed deep concerns about him, pointing out he had given himself the title of Ngwazi, or chief of chiefs, an honour previously claimed by Banda.
“This is a dictator in the making,” she said, pointing out that relatives of hers have been threatened with consequences to their businesses because of her political activities.
“I was scared of Muluzi; I’m scared of Bingu. I never met Banda, but it’s no different, it’s the same. They all come from the same culture.”
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
A Detailed analysis of the Leading Parties and their chances (Part II of II)
Source: http://eltasmw.blogspot.com/2009/04/detailed-analysis-of-leading-parties.html
Blogger: Charles Odziwa, Blantyre Malawi
John Tembo & Bakili Muluzi
Malawi Congress Party/United Democratic Front
Muluzi has given up on the presidential race after Malawi Electoral Commission blocked him on the ground that he ruled the country for the constitutional two five-year terms. In response, he has taken his party into an alliance with MCP. This is a formidable combination likely to unsettle Bingu. Muluzi has a large cult following from the South. Tembo has over the years been a cult-hero for the people in the Central region.
In fact, in the 2004 elections, Tembo just narrowly missed the presidency after acquiring a very large number of votes from the Central region where he comes from. His party went on to win the most seats in parliament. All MPs came from the region. Election is a game of numbers and going by this, combined voters behind Muluzi and those behind Tembo makes such a sum Bingu would not just wish away.
This is the major strength of the alliance so far.
The other strength is that both UDF and MCP have diehard supporters who follow their parties at all cost, whether with or without an agenda for the nation. This is the characteristic that Bingu’s DPP may not have. The rabble rousers in the alliance are likely to work up the illiterate classes of people. This is the likely spot where Bingu could lose ground. He is technocratic in his leadership and is likely to score highly on educated and knowledgeable people. But these are fewer. And often, these classes of people do not go to vote.
Pitfalls
Some say the alliance is not a threat to Bingu after all because even if Muluzi and Tembo agree on terms or on how they are going to share the cabinet positions after the elections, MCP will not honour the agreements.
Some UDF supporters see this as a wasteful alliance because they believe that what has been done will not serve the interest of the party. The point is that UDF will go to the elections without a candidate of its own and this could be a step closer to its death. This prospect is attributed to Muluzi greed to hold on to the reigns of the party even long before it was clear that he would be barred from standing. The followers argue that Muluzi should have then groomed somebody else to take over from him.
This measures the tough time that UDF has, in part to convince some sections of UDF supporters to vote for Tembo. Tembo is generally associated with the darkness of Malawi’s political past. For example, UDF has had an unflinching support from Mangochi, one of districts with the largest number of voters in the country. This is one of the areas Tembo would need so he could shore up his electoral support. Yet this is the district that heavily dislikes Tembo because of this: during the rule of the MCP, Henry Masauko Chipembere was treated by the government then as one of the rebels. When he fled to US, MCP herded everyone in Chipemebere’s Moto village to prison for the sins of their son. This has been a very huge scar on MCP’s political identity in the district. The alliance must convert such people across the country into voting for Tembo.
It is argued further that the alliance is up against a government that has fulfilled its campaign manifestos. The alliance does not seem to have an alternative to offer. High on the agenda is to just to remove Bingu, an objective coming out of power greed. This is explained further by the fact that the parties are coming together with no unified manifestos.
Their reliance on regional support is premised in the outcomes of the previous elections where people have voted for a candidate from their region. But analysts have cautioned on working on such mathematics as it might not be the case this time. DPP does not have a stronghold region. It is observed that it has a considerable presence in all the regions of the country, so it would win because of those pockets of support.
Perhaps, this comment by a voter in one of the dailies could sum up the spirit of the time.
“Any party would be threatened [by the alliance]. When a bunch of time wasters form an alliance, the strong one is shaken but not thrown off balance. It is a threat but not enough to overthrow Bingu. Even UDF and MCP know that Bingu is a strong guy. Imagine they have had to form an alliance.”
Blogger: Charles Odziwa, Blantyre Malawi
John Tembo & Bakili Muluzi
Malawi Congress Party/United Democratic Front
Muluzi has given up on the presidential race after Malawi Electoral Commission blocked him on the ground that he ruled the country for the constitutional two five-year terms. In response, he has taken his party into an alliance with MCP. This is a formidable combination likely to unsettle Bingu. Muluzi has a large cult following from the South. Tembo has over the years been a cult-hero for the people in the Central region.
In fact, in the 2004 elections, Tembo just narrowly missed the presidency after acquiring a very large number of votes from the Central region where he comes from. His party went on to win the most seats in parliament. All MPs came from the region. Election is a game of numbers and going by this, combined voters behind Muluzi and those behind Tembo makes such a sum Bingu would not just wish away.
This is the major strength of the alliance so far.
The other strength is that both UDF and MCP have diehard supporters who follow their parties at all cost, whether with or without an agenda for the nation. This is the characteristic that Bingu’s DPP may not have. The rabble rousers in the alliance are likely to work up the illiterate classes of people. This is the likely spot where Bingu could lose ground. He is technocratic in his leadership and is likely to score highly on educated and knowledgeable people. But these are fewer. And often, these classes of people do not go to vote.
Pitfalls
Some say the alliance is not a threat to Bingu after all because even if Muluzi and Tembo agree on terms or on how they are going to share the cabinet positions after the elections, MCP will not honour the agreements.
Some UDF supporters see this as a wasteful alliance because they believe that what has been done will not serve the interest of the party. The point is that UDF will go to the elections without a candidate of its own and this could be a step closer to its death. This prospect is attributed to Muluzi greed to hold on to the reigns of the party even long before it was clear that he would be barred from standing. The followers argue that Muluzi should have then groomed somebody else to take over from him.
This measures the tough time that UDF has, in part to convince some sections of UDF supporters to vote for Tembo. Tembo is generally associated with the darkness of Malawi’s political past. For example, UDF has had an unflinching support from Mangochi, one of districts with the largest number of voters in the country. This is one of the areas Tembo would need so he could shore up his electoral support. Yet this is the district that heavily dislikes Tembo because of this: during the rule of the MCP, Henry Masauko Chipembere was treated by the government then as one of the rebels. When he fled to US, MCP herded everyone in Chipemebere’s Moto village to prison for the sins of their son. This has been a very huge scar on MCP’s political identity in the district. The alliance must convert such people across the country into voting for Tembo.
It is argued further that the alliance is up against a government that has fulfilled its campaign manifestos. The alliance does not seem to have an alternative to offer. High on the agenda is to just to remove Bingu, an objective coming out of power greed. This is explained further by the fact that the parties are coming together with no unified manifestos.
Their reliance on regional support is premised in the outcomes of the previous elections where people have voted for a candidate from their region. But analysts have cautioned on working on such mathematics as it might not be the case this time. DPP does not have a stronghold region. It is observed that it has a considerable presence in all the regions of the country, so it would win because of those pockets of support.
Perhaps, this comment by a voter in one of the dailies could sum up the spirit of the time.
“Any party would be threatened [by the alliance]. When a bunch of time wasters form an alliance, the strong one is shaken but not thrown off balance. It is a threat but not enough to overthrow Bingu. Even UDF and MCP know that Bingu is a strong guy. Imagine they have had to form an alliance.”
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
A Detailed analysis of the Leading Parties and their chances (Part 1)
Source: http://eltasmw.blogspot.com/2009/04/detailed-analysis-of-leading-parties.html
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Blogger: Charles Odziwa
Blantyre Malawi
Bingu wa Mutharika & Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)
Analysts agree that there has not been any time since Malawi turned a multiparty democracy in 1993 that Malawians have had reason to be hopeful of a better future than during the time Bingu has been at the helm of government.
In comparison with Muluzi who ruled the country between 1994 and 2004, Bingu has achieved considerably in his first five year term in various key sectors. Malawi has not begged for food for the past five years, In fact, it has been able to donate food to other countries in Africa. The economy has been stable making the environment conducive to macro-investment. There has also been emphasis on micro-business growth through loans and empowerment of communities to take up industrial production to their scale. And for the first time in the history of this country, Malawi has joined the club of uranium mining nations in the world. Two weeks ago, Bingu commissioned a uranium mine in the North. The mine is expected to add at least 10 percent to the country’s GDP and could be a competitor to Malawi’s main foreign exchange earner tobacco whose fortunes have been on the decline for several years running. The IMF came to Malawi two weeks ago and said they were impressed with the way Malawi’s economy is ticking. An IMF official said in 2009, Malawi’s economy would grow by 6 percent beating the expected regional growth of 3 percent. Towards the end of last year, Malawi’s economy was pitted by the Economic Intelligence Unit as the world’s fastest growing economy.
Education infrastructure has been a feature of his government. So has been road infrastructure which has opened many rural areas, making travelling easier and enabling rural farmers to ferry their produce easily to better markets. Women are lesser being trampled upon now because of Bingu’s empowerment of them. There has been notable improvement in health sector with more infrastructure and incentives for health personnel which has seen a significant reduction in flight of nurses to countries outside Malawi for greener pastures.
He has also cracked down on corruption. There are still cases of corruption going on but the situation has not been as rampant as it was during the time of Muluzi. There has also been relative security for the citizens over the years.
It is on account of the achievements of his government that an opinion poll by one SADC regional body put Bingu way ahead of the rest. His margin of victory in the elections would not be filled even by those of UDF and MCP combined, according to the results by the body, Afro-Barometer.
Pitfalls
It is generally agreed that Bingu has been weak on rule of law. He has at times even questioned and rejected some of the decisions made by the courts, decisions that have not favoured his government. Some fear that given a majority in parliament, Bingu could step over the line and become repressive.
He is not the sort who likes compromises. In all the four previous budget session of parliament, his government side, a minority, has struggled to have the opposition approve the national budget. Not at one time did Bingu move to strike a deal with the opposition for them to change their heart on the budget. Instead, he would lambaste them in mass rallies as being inconsiderate. To a reasonable person, his stance was good anyway, considering the fact that on many such occasions, opposition was just intent on giving Bingu’s government a torrid time. And he has been receiving support from sections of the civil society in that regard. But the opposition has been using his toughness to discredit him.
In spite of his good policies and achievements, Bingu is not an eloquent speaker. His lack of verbal power in vernacular makes him unable to articulate his development agenda with such emotional, mass appeal. Some analysts describe this as his undoing because his rivals in the opposition are rabble rousers of sorts who can present even a senseless, vain point into an electoral weapon.
The coming together of MCP and UDF in an alliance against Bingu is a potential threat to his chances of retaining the presidency. He has dismissed the alliance, saying he will effectively deal with both on May 19.
To be posted tomorrow:
John Tembo & Bakili Muluzi
Malawi Congress Party/United Democratic Front
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Blogger: Charles Odziwa
Blantyre Malawi
Bingu wa Mutharika & Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)
Analysts agree that there has not been any time since Malawi turned a multiparty democracy in 1993 that Malawians have had reason to be hopeful of a better future than during the time Bingu has been at the helm of government.
In comparison with Muluzi who ruled the country between 1994 and 2004, Bingu has achieved considerably in his first five year term in various key sectors. Malawi has not begged for food for the past five years, In fact, it has been able to donate food to other countries in Africa. The economy has been stable making the environment conducive to macro-investment. There has also been emphasis on micro-business growth through loans and empowerment of communities to take up industrial production to their scale. And for the first time in the history of this country, Malawi has joined the club of uranium mining nations in the world. Two weeks ago, Bingu commissioned a uranium mine in the North. The mine is expected to add at least 10 percent to the country’s GDP and could be a competitor to Malawi’s main foreign exchange earner tobacco whose fortunes have been on the decline for several years running. The IMF came to Malawi two weeks ago and said they were impressed with the way Malawi’s economy is ticking. An IMF official said in 2009, Malawi’s economy would grow by 6 percent beating the expected regional growth of 3 percent. Towards the end of last year, Malawi’s economy was pitted by the Economic Intelligence Unit as the world’s fastest growing economy.
Education infrastructure has been a feature of his government. So has been road infrastructure which has opened many rural areas, making travelling easier and enabling rural farmers to ferry their produce easily to better markets. Women are lesser being trampled upon now because of Bingu’s empowerment of them. There has been notable improvement in health sector with more infrastructure and incentives for health personnel which has seen a significant reduction in flight of nurses to countries outside Malawi for greener pastures.
He has also cracked down on corruption. There are still cases of corruption going on but the situation has not been as rampant as it was during the time of Muluzi. There has also been relative security for the citizens over the years.
It is on account of the achievements of his government that an opinion poll by one SADC regional body put Bingu way ahead of the rest. His margin of victory in the elections would not be filled even by those of UDF and MCP combined, according to the results by the body, Afro-Barometer.
Pitfalls
It is generally agreed that Bingu has been weak on rule of law. He has at times even questioned and rejected some of the decisions made by the courts, decisions that have not favoured his government. Some fear that given a majority in parliament, Bingu could step over the line and become repressive.
He is not the sort who likes compromises. In all the four previous budget session of parliament, his government side, a minority, has struggled to have the opposition approve the national budget. Not at one time did Bingu move to strike a deal with the opposition for them to change their heart on the budget. Instead, he would lambaste them in mass rallies as being inconsiderate. To a reasonable person, his stance was good anyway, considering the fact that on many such occasions, opposition was just intent on giving Bingu’s government a torrid time. And he has been receiving support from sections of the civil society in that regard. But the opposition has been using his toughness to discredit him.
In spite of his good policies and achievements, Bingu is not an eloquent speaker. His lack of verbal power in vernacular makes him unable to articulate his development agenda with such emotional, mass appeal. Some analysts describe this as his undoing because his rivals in the opposition are rabble rousers of sorts who can present even a senseless, vain point into an electoral weapon.
The coming together of MCP and UDF in an alliance against Bingu is a potential threat to his chances of retaining the presidency. He has dismissed the alliance, saying he will effectively deal with both on May 19.
To be posted tomorrow:
John Tembo & Bakili Muluzi
Malawi Congress Party/United Democratic Front
Monday, April 27, 2009
MALAWI AT THE CROSSROADS: The last great battle of the Kamuzu era giants?
Wednesday 6th May
6pm-19:15
Room H102
London School of Economics
Speakers: Dr Linje Manyozo (LSE), Bernabe Sanchez (World Bank), Chifundo Kachale (SOAS Law School)
Malawi goes to the polls on May 19th in a crucial election that will either return current president, Bingu wa Mutharika, or replace him with veteran John Tembo, once the political henchman of Hastings Banda. But, if he wins, will Mutharika secure a parliamentary majority? And if Tembo wins will his coalition, which includes former president Bakili Muluzi, hold together?
The politics are bitter and highly personal but there is also a real choice for voters. Is the election about the economy where Mutharika can claim some success, or is it about the political system where the opposition champions democratic process and the constitution?
These issues are profound and the future of Malawi is at stake in what is the hardest fought battle for power since Malawi turned to multi-party democracy.
RSVP: ras_research@soas.ac.uk
For directions visit www2.lse.ac.uk/mapsAndDirections/Home.aspx
Please visit www.royalafricansociety.org for updates, or call 020 3073 8337 for information
Location
Venue London School of Economics
Homepage: No Homepage available
Street: Houghton Street
City WC2A 2AE
Country: United Kingdom
6pm-19:15
Room H102
London School of Economics
Speakers: Dr Linje Manyozo (LSE), Bernabe Sanchez (World Bank), Chifundo Kachale (SOAS Law School)
Malawi goes to the polls on May 19th in a crucial election that will either return current president, Bingu wa Mutharika, or replace him with veteran John Tembo, once the political henchman of Hastings Banda. But, if he wins, will Mutharika secure a parliamentary majority? And if Tembo wins will his coalition, which includes former president Bakili Muluzi, hold together?
The politics are bitter and highly personal but there is also a real choice for voters. Is the election about the economy where Mutharika can claim some success, or is it about the political system where the opposition champions democratic process and the constitution?
These issues are profound and the future of Malawi is at stake in what is the hardest fought battle for power since Malawi turned to multi-party democracy.
RSVP: ras_research@soas.ac.uk
For directions visit www2.lse.ac.uk/mapsAndDirections/Home.aspx
Please visit www.royalafricansociety.org for updates, or call 020 3073 8337 for information
Location
Venue London School of Economics
Homepage: No Homepage available
Street: Houghton Street
City WC2A 2AE
Country: United Kingdom
RADIO DPP or Radio MBC
Below are comments by Diana Cammack, a dedicated and committed activist with a passion for Malawi. She is currently resident in RSA but keeps a keen interest on whats happening here in Malawi.
"It is sad to see this, but not unusual. In 1994 ARTICLE 19 monitored election coverage and again in 1999, and it was monitored in 2004 by a different group. In all of these elections, MBC and when broadcasting, TVM have been biased. The Ministry's publications and news service are also biased, and when GTZ/NICE called MBC's bluff (giving them vehicles when they said they had none to cover other candidates' rallies) in 1999 campaign, the ruling government did not use the vehicles... So, its a matter of political will.
In my view, it has nothing to do with the ruling party per se (as its been MCP, UDF and now DPP) but this is symptomatic of a need to change the nature of broadcasting ownership in Malawi. There is no need for a Ministry of Info, except to spread propaganda. Instead, there could be an info person attached (and responsible) to a ministry that could advertise its work, e.g., # clinics built, funds received, cases dealt with, babies delivered, etc. These info clerks should have a technical mandate.
The ruling party has many advantages when re=running for govt (which is why parties don't want to let go of power)... and control of the media is only one. Imagine if we see this abuse of media because its aimed at the public, what other abuses of govt resources might go on?! Remember, the K187m that was pilferred from the Min of Educ was used to win the 1999 election.
So, how to get a govt in power that is willing to abolish the current Min of Info and set up a new system of public media? which of the parties/presidential candidates do you trust to do that? If none, then what is civil society prepared to do the get change underway?
D"
"It is sad to see this, but not unusual. In 1994 ARTICLE 19 monitored election coverage and again in 1999, and it was monitored in 2004 by a different group. In all of these elections, MBC and when broadcasting, TVM have been biased. The Ministry's publications and news service are also biased, and when GTZ/NICE called MBC's bluff (giving them vehicles when they said they had none to cover other candidates' rallies) in 1999 campaign, the ruling government did not use the vehicles... So, its a matter of political will.
In my view, it has nothing to do with the ruling party per se (as its been MCP, UDF and now DPP) but this is symptomatic of a need to change the nature of broadcasting ownership in Malawi. There is no need for a Ministry of Info, except to spread propaganda. Instead, there could be an info person attached (and responsible) to a ministry that could advertise its work, e.g., # clinics built, funds received, cases dealt with, babies delivered, etc. These info clerks should have a technical mandate.
The ruling party has many advantages when re=running for govt (which is why parties don't want to let go of power)... and control of the media is only one. Imagine if we see this abuse of media because its aimed at the public, what other abuses of govt resources might go on?! Remember, the K187m that was pilferred from the Min of Educ was used to win the 1999 election.
So, how to get a govt in power that is willing to abolish the current Min of Info and set up a new system of public media? which of the parties/presidential candidates do you trust to do that? If none, then what is civil society prepared to do the get change underway?
D"
Sunday, April 26, 2009
MALAWI'S RADIO DPP or RADIO MBC
Came across the Broadcasting Monitoring report published by MACRA in the papers last week and was quite disappointed to see the domination of the airwaves from MBC & TVM.
Media coverage by the 2 state owned Media house, Television Malawi (TVM) and Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) has not been balanced and fair with most of the political coverage being in favour of the current ruling party, the DPP.
MBC,by far the oldest radio station in the country with the widest national coverage had 100% positive coverage for DPP and TVM, the only local TV station in the country, had 93% coverage in DPP's favour.
Came across the following case of a similar situation that took place in 1999. This makes for interesting reading and can be used as a precedent for a similar case with the current state of affairs.
Malawi voters celebrate: media coverage of elections must be fair.
Dr. Charles Kafumba& Ors. vs The Electoral Commission & Anor.
High Court of Malawi
Misc. Cause No. 35 of 1999
June 1999
While this ruling was made in 1999 it stands to be respected today
THE HIGH COURT of Malawi, Mkandawire J. presiding, ordered the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) to give equitable coverage to all political parties and all presidential candidates in the general election held last May. It held that the live coverage by MBC of the incumbent president's rallies during which campaign statements promoting the ruling party were made not only violated the Communications Act and the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act, but also amounted to unfair discrimination, which was contrary to section 20 of the Malawi Constitution.
Facts
Three Malawi citizens instituted an action in the High Court against the Malawi Electoral Commission and the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation seeking a determination by the court that the Electoral Commission had a duty in law to ensure the electoral process was free and fair; that equal access to the media for all competitors in the election was an integral part of holding free and fair elections; that the Electoral Commission had failed to ensure for all competitors equal and fair access to the state media.
Further, the plaintiffs asked the court to determine that the MBC was under an obligation to accord equal or free and fair access to its facilities to all competitors in the electoral process; that it had accorded preferential treatment and access to the ruling United Democratic Front and its presidential candidate, President Bakili Muluzi, and other of its candidates; and that MBC had violated its legal obligation to the nation and to all other competitors in the electoral process by failing to accord such competitors equal and fair access to its broadcasting facilities.
The plaintiffs therefore asked the court to give declarations and directions that the electoral commission be ordered to take the necessary steps to ensure free and fair elections by ensuring that all competitors in the election receive equal and/or fair access to all state controlled media and in particular, the MBC; and specifically to ensure that the MBC was in compliance with the provisions of relevant law. They also asked the court to order MBC to comply with the two Acts and the Constitution as well as internationally recognised practice to give all competitors equal access to its facilities during the campaign period.
Decision
The court dismissed the claim against the Electoral Commission, who were the first defendants in the case, after finding from the available evidence that the Commission had "done all that it can do to ensure that all political parties have free and equal access to the MBC." Turning to the case against the MBC, the court reviewed counsel's submissions that it was an age old practice in Malawi to broadcast live all presidential functions, but observed that the plaintiffs were not questioning such live coverage of presidential functions. What they were questioning was the live coverage of campaign messages during those functions.
They did not want such coverage to be shut down in the event that campaign messages were slipped in but rather they wanted all candidates and parties to be treated equally; which meant that if in the process of presidential functions campaign messages were covered live then the same should be accorded to all political parties and election candidates. The court agreed with the plaintiffs' contention that current practice by the MBC violated s. 45 (1) (f) of the Communications Act and s. 58 of the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act, which provide that all political parties and elections candidates be given equitable or equal treatment during election or campaign period.
"To give live coverage to one party and its candidates is not only in breach of the above Sections but it is also discriminatory," observed the court adding that discrimination was outlawed by s. 20 of the Malawi Constitution. The court concluded: "If campaign messages are broadcast live at a presidential function, then equal treatment means that campaign rallies of other political parties or… other presidential candidates be broadcast live. That would give (them) an opportunity to reply to some of the matters raised. That is what equitable treatment of political parties and elections candidates would entail….[E]qual treatment of all competitors is a component of free and fair elections." The court found the MBC in breach of the relevant law as well as the Malawi Constitution and directed it to comply with those provisions. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
Commentary
The ruling of the Malawi court in this case comes as a breath of fresh air in the area of election coverage in the region. Almost without exception, incumbent parties have the habit of hijacking state resources to campaign for their candidates during and in between elections. ARTICLE 19 has monitored broadcasting coverage of elections in Kenya, Mozambique, Malawi and Zimbabwe and found that public broadcasters are unashamedly partisan.
One of the loopholes that is frequently exploited is that the broadcaster merely covers presidential functions and is helpless to do anything to stop abuse by a president or politicians of his party who uses the forum to campaign for the ruling party. The MBC tried to use the same argument, but the court refused to have wool pulled over its eyes in this way. It is hoped that judges elsewhere shall follow Mkandawire J's bold example especially as the region prepares for another round of general elections.
Media coverage by the 2 state owned Media house, Television Malawi (TVM) and Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) has not been balanced and fair with most of the political coverage being in favour of the current ruling party, the DPP.
MBC,by far the oldest radio station in the country with the widest national coverage had 100% positive coverage for DPP and TVM, the only local TV station in the country, had 93% coverage in DPP's favour.
Came across the following case of a similar situation that took place in 1999. This makes for interesting reading and can be used as a precedent for a similar case with the current state of affairs.
Malawi voters celebrate: media coverage of elections must be fair.
Dr. Charles Kafumba& Ors. vs The Electoral Commission & Anor.
High Court of Malawi
Misc. Cause No. 35 of 1999
June 1999
While this ruling was made in 1999 it stands to be respected today
THE HIGH COURT of Malawi, Mkandawire J. presiding, ordered the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) to give equitable coverage to all political parties and all presidential candidates in the general election held last May. It held that the live coverage by MBC of the incumbent president's rallies during which campaign statements promoting the ruling party were made not only violated the Communications Act and the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act, but also amounted to unfair discrimination, which was contrary to section 20 of the Malawi Constitution.
Facts
Three Malawi citizens instituted an action in the High Court against the Malawi Electoral Commission and the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation seeking a determination by the court that the Electoral Commission had a duty in law to ensure the electoral process was free and fair; that equal access to the media for all competitors in the election was an integral part of holding free and fair elections; that the Electoral Commission had failed to ensure for all competitors equal and fair access to the state media.
Further, the plaintiffs asked the court to determine that the MBC was under an obligation to accord equal or free and fair access to its facilities to all competitors in the electoral process; that it had accorded preferential treatment and access to the ruling United Democratic Front and its presidential candidate, President Bakili Muluzi, and other of its candidates; and that MBC had violated its legal obligation to the nation and to all other competitors in the electoral process by failing to accord such competitors equal and fair access to its broadcasting facilities.
The plaintiffs therefore asked the court to give declarations and directions that the electoral commission be ordered to take the necessary steps to ensure free and fair elections by ensuring that all competitors in the election receive equal and/or fair access to all state controlled media and in particular, the MBC; and specifically to ensure that the MBC was in compliance with the provisions of relevant law. They also asked the court to order MBC to comply with the two Acts and the Constitution as well as internationally recognised practice to give all competitors equal access to its facilities during the campaign period.
Decision
The court dismissed the claim against the Electoral Commission, who were the first defendants in the case, after finding from the available evidence that the Commission had "done all that it can do to ensure that all political parties have free and equal access to the MBC." Turning to the case against the MBC, the court reviewed counsel's submissions that it was an age old practice in Malawi to broadcast live all presidential functions, but observed that the plaintiffs were not questioning such live coverage of presidential functions. What they were questioning was the live coverage of campaign messages during those functions.
They did not want such coverage to be shut down in the event that campaign messages were slipped in but rather they wanted all candidates and parties to be treated equally; which meant that if in the process of presidential functions campaign messages were covered live then the same should be accorded to all political parties and election candidates. The court agreed with the plaintiffs' contention that current practice by the MBC violated s. 45 (1) (f) of the Communications Act and s. 58 of the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act, which provide that all political parties and elections candidates be given equitable or equal treatment during election or campaign period.
"To give live coverage to one party and its candidates is not only in breach of the above Sections but it is also discriminatory," observed the court adding that discrimination was outlawed by s. 20 of the Malawi Constitution. The court concluded: "If campaign messages are broadcast live at a presidential function, then equal treatment means that campaign rallies of other political parties or… other presidential candidates be broadcast live. That would give (them) an opportunity to reply to some of the matters raised. That is what equitable treatment of political parties and elections candidates would entail….[E]qual treatment of all competitors is a component of free and fair elections." The court found the MBC in breach of the relevant law as well as the Malawi Constitution and directed it to comply with those provisions. Costs were awarded to the plaintiff.
Commentary
The ruling of the Malawi court in this case comes as a breath of fresh air in the area of election coverage in the region. Almost without exception, incumbent parties have the habit of hijacking state resources to campaign for their candidates during and in between elections. ARTICLE 19 has monitored broadcasting coverage of elections in Kenya, Mozambique, Malawi and Zimbabwe and found that public broadcasters are unashamedly partisan.
One of the loopholes that is frequently exploited is that the broadcaster merely covers presidential functions and is helpless to do anything to stop abuse by a president or politicians of his party who uses the forum to campaign for the ruling party. The MBC tried to use the same argument, but the court refused to have wool pulled over its eyes in this way. It is hoped that judges elsewhere shall follow Mkandawire J's bold example especially as the region prepares for another round of general elections.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Africa Needs Fair Trade More Than Aid- Malawi's Finance Minister Goodall Gondwe
Malawi: Africa Needs Fair Trade More Than Aid, Says Finance Minister
Goodall Gondwe
27 March 2009
________________________________________
OPINION
There is little doubt that the current global financial crisis was triggered by the failure of regulatory authorities to arrest the systemic risk posed by the use of derivatives and other such innovations in the US subprime housing sector.
The consequences of the downturn, as is already becoming clear in many countries across the world, are profound. But it is crucial that lessons be drawn from this slump to make a recurrence less likely.
A key outcome of reforms to the global financial architecture should be the expansion of the regulatory authority of multilateral organisations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
It is essential that the Financial Sector Assessment Programme, for example, should be extended to economies across the world. This would enable regulators to go into countries and conduct in-depth financial sector assessments with the dual purpose of providing early warnings on possible risks in the financial system and advising on fiscal policy that would maintain macro-economic stability.
In addition, surveillance should involve peer review within the IMF to ensure that members, whether in industrialised countries or least developed economies, feel the need to pursue responsible policies. For Africa, the downturn may well spell a reduction in overseas development assistance. Governments in developed economies are already feeling the pressure to cut public expenditure and it stands to reason that development aid will not be spared the cutbacks.
But this approach would deal a terrible blow to developing countries and millions of the world's poor population. It will mean developing countries will have falling revenues and will inevitably fail to maintain the high rates of economic growth that have been experienced in recent years. This makes any moves to increase the capacity of lenders such as the IMF to boost aid highly necessary. This should include the reactivation of Special Drawing Rights (freely usable currencies at the disposal of the IMF) or indeed any other new credit facilities at the IMF and the World Bank.
In this context, it is essential that African leaders have their voices heard in the debate on possible reforms to the global financial architecture. While it is noteworthy that the British Prime Minister has invited notable African leaders to discuss issues that are of interest to the continent, it would be appropriate that Africa should be more adequately represented in the G20. The current situation where only South Africa represents the continent is less than appropriate.
More importantly, it should be understood that fairer global trade regimes would be more useful to Africa than aid. Not only is the African farmer threatened by the fall in commodity prices, particularly agricultural products, but he is also threatened by the producer subsidies that are being introduced in developed countries, especially in the USA and Europe. These subsidies price the African producer out of the global market, exacerbating poverty as a result.
Africa's trading partners could therefore help by instituting measures that will promote the growth of the market for African products at a price that will sustain production. In addition, a fund could be set aside to compensate the African producer for losses arising from declining terms of trade. Eligibility could be based on evidence-based research justifying the need for additional help from developing countries.
The last decade has seen impressive levels of economic expansion in most of Sub-Saharan Africa. Malawi, for example, has seen growth rates increased from a meager 2 percent to 8 percent within a few years.
African policymakers should ensure that the prudent macro- economic policies that have yielded accelerated growth are maintained, despite the downturn. In particular, there is need to maintain or increase expenditure on infrastructure development, education and health. The reduction in global oil and fertiliser prices should provide Africa with fiscal space for additional investment in development enhancing activities such as expenditure on education, health and infrastructure development.
On their part, developed countries could help Africa by ensuring that development aid continues to flow despite the challenges being faced in their respective economies as a result of the crisis.
Goodall Gondwe is Malawi's finance minister.
Goodall Gondwe
27 March 2009
________________________________________
OPINION
There is little doubt that the current global financial crisis was triggered by the failure of regulatory authorities to arrest the systemic risk posed by the use of derivatives and other such innovations in the US subprime housing sector.
The consequences of the downturn, as is already becoming clear in many countries across the world, are profound. But it is crucial that lessons be drawn from this slump to make a recurrence less likely.
A key outcome of reforms to the global financial architecture should be the expansion of the regulatory authority of multilateral organisations such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
It is essential that the Financial Sector Assessment Programme, for example, should be extended to economies across the world. This would enable regulators to go into countries and conduct in-depth financial sector assessments with the dual purpose of providing early warnings on possible risks in the financial system and advising on fiscal policy that would maintain macro-economic stability.
In addition, surveillance should involve peer review within the IMF to ensure that members, whether in industrialised countries or least developed economies, feel the need to pursue responsible policies. For Africa, the downturn may well spell a reduction in overseas development assistance. Governments in developed economies are already feeling the pressure to cut public expenditure and it stands to reason that development aid will not be spared the cutbacks.
But this approach would deal a terrible blow to developing countries and millions of the world's poor population. It will mean developing countries will have falling revenues and will inevitably fail to maintain the high rates of economic growth that have been experienced in recent years. This makes any moves to increase the capacity of lenders such as the IMF to boost aid highly necessary. This should include the reactivation of Special Drawing Rights (freely usable currencies at the disposal of the IMF) or indeed any other new credit facilities at the IMF and the World Bank.
In this context, it is essential that African leaders have their voices heard in the debate on possible reforms to the global financial architecture. While it is noteworthy that the British Prime Minister has invited notable African leaders to discuss issues that are of interest to the continent, it would be appropriate that Africa should be more adequately represented in the G20. The current situation where only South Africa represents the continent is less than appropriate.
More importantly, it should be understood that fairer global trade regimes would be more useful to Africa than aid. Not only is the African farmer threatened by the fall in commodity prices, particularly agricultural products, but he is also threatened by the producer subsidies that are being introduced in developed countries, especially in the USA and Europe. These subsidies price the African producer out of the global market, exacerbating poverty as a result.
Africa's trading partners could therefore help by instituting measures that will promote the growth of the market for African products at a price that will sustain production. In addition, a fund could be set aside to compensate the African producer for losses arising from declining terms of trade. Eligibility could be based on evidence-based research justifying the need for additional help from developing countries.
The last decade has seen impressive levels of economic expansion in most of Sub-Saharan Africa. Malawi, for example, has seen growth rates increased from a meager 2 percent to 8 percent within a few years.
African policymakers should ensure that the prudent macro- economic policies that have yielded accelerated growth are maintained, despite the downturn. In particular, there is need to maintain or increase expenditure on infrastructure development, education and health. The reduction in global oil and fertiliser prices should provide Africa with fiscal space for additional investment in development enhancing activities such as expenditure on education, health and infrastructure development.
On their part, developed countries could help Africa by ensuring that development aid continues to flow despite the challenges being faced in their respective economies as a result of the crisis.
Goodall Gondwe is Malawi's finance minister.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Next Malawi President - "110% up north is 4 Bingu"
I circulated the previous posting to others within Malawi's Civil Society and received the following response:
Dear Abbas,
Thank u 4 e-mail of yesterday, in my view, Bingu is still poised to win this election because of what he has achieved for malawians.Here in kasungu , of all places, many young poeple , male or female have developed very big LIKING for Bingu becaise of the improved securiry, food supplies, Education- no closures of the University etc. A day ago I was up north, man, you should have been there. 110% up north is 4 Bingu.What makes the opposition undesirable in the minds of many young people are the opposition leaders own untractable SELF DECAMPAIGNING words. Young Malawians of today are intellectualls. They know who is lying, back tracking,self contradicting, ambiguos, montonous, and they are busy telling the same to their village folks.Go to Madisi and hear for yourself the views of an ordinally market vendor, why they think Bingu is the man because he has delivered and will therefore deliver again! Abbas, in Chichewa there is a saying which says": FISI AKALILA SABWEZA !". In English this literally means: "once a fool always a fool".Malawians are not babies who can be made to quickly forget somebodys sins of yesterday.Lesoons for the opposition in this regard abound! Thank u 4 sharing your views with me, Abbas.GOD BLESS U ! LET US UNITE IN PRAYER FOR A LEADER WHO LOVES US AND NOT HIMSELF! WHO IS DEVELOMENT CENTRERED, AND NOT HATRED OR VENGEANCE MOTIVATED !
Alfred Bwanali [abwanali@gmail.com]
Dear Abbas,
Thank u 4 e-mail of yesterday, in my view, Bingu is still poised to win this election because of what he has achieved for malawians.Here in kasungu , of all places, many young poeple , male or female have developed very big LIKING for Bingu becaise of the improved securiry, food supplies, Education- no closures of the University etc. A day ago I was up north, man, you should have been there. 110% up north is 4 Bingu.What makes the opposition undesirable in the minds of many young people are the opposition leaders own untractable SELF DECAMPAIGNING words. Young Malawians of today are intellectualls. They know who is lying, back tracking,self contradicting, ambiguos, montonous, and they are busy telling the same to their village folks.Go to Madisi and hear for yourself the views of an ordinally market vendor, why they think Bingu is the man because he has delivered and will therefore deliver again! Abbas, in Chichewa there is a saying which says": FISI AKALILA SABWEZA !". In English this literally means: "once a fool always a fool".Malawians are not babies who can be made to quickly forget somebodys sins of yesterday.Lesoons for the opposition in this regard abound! Thank u 4 sharing your views with me, Abbas.GOD BLESS U ! LET US UNITE IN PRAYER FOR A LEADER WHO LOVES US AND NOT HIMSELF! WHO IS DEVELOMENT CENTRERED, AND NOT HATRED OR VENGEANCE MOTIVATED !
Alfred Bwanali [abwanali@gmail.com]
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
“THE ENEMY OF MY ENEMY IS MY FRIEND” (Arabian Proverb)
The Chinese have a similar proverb that says, "It is good to strike the serpent's head with your enemy's hand."
These proverbs seem quite appropriate for the current political scenario rolling out in Malawi. The ‘surprise’ move by 2 of the largest parties to merge has drastically changes the demographics for the upcoming elections.
Some say this was the plan all along hence Brown Mpinganjira’s move to join the MCP tag team early in the race. According to some, the strategy was for former president Bakili Muluzi to submit his nomination papers knowing all along that the chances were slim for his nomination to go through. The rejection would be shown as political manoeuvrings by the ruling party to block him from contesting and hence reflect badly on them. This was reinforced by the ill-timed ACB case against him that ‘surprising’ came up just before the elections.
Some political analysts have always maintained that JZU Tembo’s (MCP) chances for the top job were already strong. The reasoning was simple mathematics: with the Southern region split 3 way between the 3 main parties, and MCP’s strength giving them the lead in the centre it was almost a given that JZU would be the next President of Malawi.
Other analysts felt that before the coalition, independent polls seemed to swing in the favour of the ruling DPP party, but this new development swings the pendulum in favour of the coalition. Muluzi & JZU, both formidable forces even when their own, will make a lethal force when combined. With these two giants joining forces the outcome of these results seems inevitable. JZU’s long awaited dream of becoming the President of Malawi will soon be realised.
One wonders what happens at the Parliamentary Elections level. Will the prospective MPs from these two parties compete with each other and split the vote in so doing paving the way to victory for DPP contestants? If the coalition is to have one candidate for each seat who would concede their candidate?
These proverbs seem quite appropriate for the current political scenario rolling out in Malawi. The ‘surprise’ move by 2 of the largest parties to merge has drastically changes the demographics for the upcoming elections.
Some say this was the plan all along hence Brown Mpinganjira’s move to join the MCP tag team early in the race. According to some, the strategy was for former president Bakili Muluzi to submit his nomination papers knowing all along that the chances were slim for his nomination to go through. The rejection would be shown as political manoeuvrings by the ruling party to block him from contesting and hence reflect badly on them. This was reinforced by the ill-timed ACB case against him that ‘surprising’ came up just before the elections.
Some political analysts have always maintained that JZU Tembo’s (MCP) chances for the top job were already strong. The reasoning was simple mathematics: with the Southern region split 3 way between the 3 main parties, and MCP’s strength giving them the lead in the centre it was almost a given that JZU would be the next President of Malawi.
Other analysts felt that before the coalition, independent polls seemed to swing in the favour of the ruling DPP party, but this new development swings the pendulum in favour of the coalition. Muluzi & JZU, both formidable forces even when their own, will make a lethal force when combined. With these two giants joining forces the outcome of these results seems inevitable. JZU’s long awaited dream of becoming the President of Malawi will soon be realised.
One wonders what happens at the Parliamentary Elections level. Will the prospective MPs from these two parties compete with each other and split the vote in so doing paving the way to victory for DPP contestants? If the coalition is to have one candidate for each seat who would concede their candidate?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
