BINGU BEFORE HE BECAME PRESIDENT

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.

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

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.”