I think there are over 20 if not 35 political parties in Malawi,
the problem is some are not even active. Some are owned by people who are in
reality members of other parties but their ‘parties’ are still recognized as
parties by the registrar of political parties.
Should there be sense in all this nonsense?
Should political parties that do not hold conventions, for
example, be de-registered? Should Malawi
legislate for party activities such as financing, election of leaders etc in
Malawi?
I spoke to several high flying names on the issue.
Dr. Henry Chingaipe started
(Henry is a Malawian scholar who was the first
successful nomination to the Commonwealth Scholarship Association by the IPPG (Research
Programme Consortium for Improving Institutions for Pro-Poor Growth), after
having worked on a research project based in Malawi with Adrian Leftwich,
co-authoring a paper on 'The politics of State-Business Relations in Malawi'. The title of
Henry's Ph.D. is 'Institution Formation, Maintenance and Change: the Politics
of State-Business Relations in Malawi'.):
Bright Mhango: What is your
take? Should there be a law regulating how parties operate (Political Parties
Act, for example)?
Dr. Chingaipe: I agree entirely with the proposal some
activities of political parties must be regulated by law. The key issue to
remember is that in democratic theory and practice, political parties are
expected to be agents of democratisation. Given that political parties give
regimes their character, it is important to regulate some activities of
political parties especially those that are central to democratic values such
as leadership selection, political financing and a few others.
I am a staunch advocate for a Political Parties Act
which should establish a reasonable, democratic legal framework for political
parties. So far, political parties have been left to their own devices and have
essentially been captured by small elite that have treated them as personal
fiefdoms. This has seriously affected the deepening and broadening of
democratic ethos in politics.
The evidence since 1994 suggests clearly that our
political system is on its way to becoming an entrenched defective democracy
largely because of acute shortage of democratic practice in political parties.
Regulating political parties or aspects thereof is not an alien idea. One
country that offers good precedent in terms of a Political Parties Act is
Germany and there are a few others. In Malawi the intention is not new either.
The 1993
Political Parties Act has in its title the words ‘registration’ and
‘regulation’. Unfortunately, the Act stops at dealing with matters around
registration and says nothing of substance with respect to ‘regulation’.
However, I do not agree with the proposal that failure
to hold a convention should automatically lead to de-registration of the party.
If there should be a single factor that leads to de-registration, my view is
that that factor should be failure of the party to field candidates in a
general election. This is because political parties exist to contest for
political power and the only way to do that in a democratic system is to
participate in an election by fielding candidates. A party that does not field
candidates therefore loses the reason for its existence. It simply becomes an
interest group that fits in another category of
organisations other than political parties.
Mhango: What would be the merits (or demerits) of such
legislation?
Dr. Chingaipe: The merits or demerits of regulating
aspects of political parties will depend on the substance of the actual
provisions of the law. However, a general standard is that the provisions
should be couched in a way that protects the democratic values especially in so
far as they accord the people full rights within parties; promote
accountability and transparency and compel decency and integrity in the
practice of partisan politics.
Mhango: What other blights do our political parties have that can
be legislated for?
Dr. Chingaipe: There are quite a number of issues. These
include the holding of annual party conferences (conventions), political
financing, candidate selection, defections (and anti-defections) and many
others that a systematic study can bring out.
Mhango: Some people would say that conventions do not actually
reflect democracy in the party, is this true for Malawi’s political parties?
Dr. Chingaipe: Of course conventions are not necessarily
a good indicator of the depth of
democracy within a political party especially when the conventions can be
manipulated in different ways depending on the agenda of the convention itself.
The key issue in Malawi is that whenever conventions
have been held since 1994, the main agenda item has been to elect office
bearers and that has been characterised with lots of undemocratic machinations
for all the political parties.
It gives the impression that in so far as choosing party
leaders, conventions have been used to legitimise choices that have been made
outside the conventions and mostly in very undemocratic manner. So not all
conventions are democratic in their outcomes.
However, if
conventions or party conferences become an annual obligation for political
parties, they will be used to articulate policy positions and to demand
accountability from the party leaderships as well from from the ‘parliamentary
group’ of the parties etc. That will enhance democracy.
Mhango: How can we make sure that parties have representative and
free and fair conventions?
Dr. Chingaipe: My view is that representation at party
conventions should be left to political parties themselves depending on their
structures. The Political Parties Act can only set the standard but party
constitutions would spell out clearly how they would meet the standard.
I also asked Billy Mayaya, human rights activist
(Billy came to prominence when he was recruited as a Programme Facilitator for Church and Society, the Human Rights and Advocacy department of the Church of Central African Presbyterian, the second largest denomination in Malawi after the Catholic Church)
Mhango: What is your take? Should there be a law
regulating how parties operate (Political Parties Act, for example)?
Mayaya:
The primacy of regulating political parties is paramount in ensuring that both
inter and intraparty democracy flourishes. It will also lessen the prevalence
of individuals forming parties just to soothe their wounded egos. Ensuring the
legal framework focuses on regulation is therefore a critical development in my
view.
Mhango: What would be the merits (or demerits) of
such legislation?
Mayaya:
In my view, there are more merits than demerits in regulating political parties
in that they will encourage more popular participation, and lessen the
propensity of party founders to view the parties they've formed as their
fiefdoms.
Mhango: What other blights do our political parties
have that can be legislated for?
Mayaya:
There is need to level the playing field in terms of party financing. It is an
open secret that there is need to regulate party financing as current trends
show that there is lack of transparency and accountability in terms of
disclosure particularly by parties in government who have a multiplicity of
sources including illicit ones
Mhango: Some people would say that conventions do
not actually reflect democracy in the party, is this true for Malawi’s
political parties? Any names or examples?
Mayaya:
Conventions are a microcosm of the wider general elections in that they help
parties to internalise pluralism and supporters to exercise their choices. In
the recent past we have had incidents where conventions took place with
questionable outcomes eg cooked results. The voting public are aware of these
anomalies. However, the more political parties subject themselves to a
convention and to oversight to regulatory bodies the less the likelihood of
manipulation.
Mhango: How can we make sure that parties have
representative and free and fair conventions?
Mayaya: there is need for stringent monitoring of
political parties as well as continous enforcement of the law related to their
regulation
I also spoke
to Rafiq Hajat, Policy Analyst.
(Rafiq Hajat is a prominent Malawian civil rights activist. He was born in Blantyre. He is the director for the Institute for Policy Interaction in Malawi. He received a B.A. in political science at Saint Xavier College in India in 1975)
Mhango:
What is your take? Should there be a law regulating how parties operate
(Political Parties Act, for example)?
Hajat: There
is already legislation on registration & regulation of political parties.
Mhango: What
would be the merits (or demerits) of such legislation?
The
law is applied selectively & thus becomes yet another weapon in the arsenal
of the party in Hajat: power.
Mhango: What other blights do our political parties have that can be legislated for?
Hajat: Adherence to their
constitutions, sources of & accounting for funding.
Mhango: Some
people would say that conventions do not actually reflect democracy in the
party, is this true for Malawi’s political parties? Any names or examples?
Hajat:
Conventions are the fora where the roots of the party, the rank & file,
have the opportunity to influence party policies & choose their leaders.
Any obviation of the event would therefore constitute denial of their
democratic rights and dilute the leadership's mandate.
Mhango: How can we make sure that parties have representative and free and fair conventions?
Hajat:
By transparency & accountability at all levels
Mhango: Any other comment
Hajat:
It is imperative for political parties to evolve with a sound ideological base,
for they are the basic building blocks of a multi-party democracy & weak
parties would therefore make a weak democracy!
Response
This did not impress Kamlepo Kaluwa leader of Malawi
Democratic Party, which many describe as a briefcase party.
“I think people are arguing out of emotion, conventions
need money, up to K40 million to gather people, eat and sleep to elect a
leader, that money can be used for party mobilisation and helping many needy
Malawians.
“What is the use of a convention if it changes nothing?
Why hold a smokescreen convention where the leadership will not change, what do
you get from that? To hell with conventions,” Bellowed Kalua.
Kalua then trashed Mayaya’s assertion that parties
should be checked in the way they acquire party funding saying unless the money
is coming from government, there is no justification for the state to pry into
the private affairs of a party.
“It’s not practical, does a wife ask how much money a
husband spend on beers, where is democracy then if the state is going to
interfere with parties? Unless the money is coming from government, they can
audit parties, but if its from private citizens with the party, there is no
need,” said Kalua.
You have heard the others, What say you?
