PRESS RELEASE
13th JUNE, 2014
The State House is pleased to inform all Malawians about the traditional wedding of His Excellency State President Professor Arthur Peter Mutharika to his long time best friend and confidant Madam Gertrude Hendrina Maseko.
A private ceremony to bless the wedding will take place on Saturday 21st June, 2014 at St Michaels and All Angels CCAP Church in Blantyre. Thereafter a family reception will be held in the village, at the Mutharika family home at Ndata farm in Thyolo district.
H.E Professor Arthur Peter Mutharika comes from Kamoto Village, Traditional Authority Chimaliro in Thyolo district while Madam Gertrude Hendrina Maseko hails from Kapasule Village, Traditional Authority Msamala in Balaka district.
Former Malawi Police Service Inspector General, Peter Mukhito, is the Organising Committee Chairperson.
State House Press Office
Lilongwe
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Friday, June 13, 2014
AFRICAN PARKS AND ICCN RESPOND TO POACHING ONSLAUGHT IN GARAMBA NATIONAL PARK, DRC
NEWS RELEASE
12 June 2014
.JPG)
Catastrophic: The hearts of the mighty elephants have been stilled at last. Picture courtesy of African Parks
African Parks has intensified its anti-poaching efforts in eastern DRC to counter the poaching onslaught that has beset Garamba National Park in the past two months. A total of 68 elephants have been poached since mid-April, representing about 4% of the total population.
Sorry sight: Elephant skull indicating bullet hole from the air and ivory removed by chainsaw.Picture courtesy of African Parks
In mid-May, African Parks reported that 33 elephants had been killed in the five weeks prior, indicating a concerted attack on the park’s elephant population. Despite intensified anti-poaching efforts since then, the total has risen to 68 elephants in the past two months, at least nine of them shot from a helicopter. On one occasion hand grenades were used against the Park’s rangers by Sudanese poachers. For the first time the brains of elephants have also been removed, together with tusks and genitals.
African Parks’ investigations have revealed that the poaching is emanating from four different sources: Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) insurgents, armed groups from South Sudan, poachers operating from a helicopter, and renegade members of the Congolese Armed Forces (FARDC). In the past few weeks Garamba’s anti-poaching teams have exchanged fire with several of these groups and five poachers have been killed. “The situation is extremely serious,” said Garamba park manager Jean-Marc Froment. “The Park is under attack on all fronts.”
Froment said that much of the poaching was being conducted by a new wave of LRA insurgents emanating from the thickly-forested Azande Domaine de Chasse (hunting zone) to the west of the park. Unlike previous encounters with the LRA, in which their weapons were old and ammunition limited, these groups have brand new weapons and ample supplies of ammunition.
The second threat comes from South Sudanese poachers, some of them wearing military uniforms, entering the Park from the north-east. “In one encounter, hand-grenades were used against our anti-poaching team in an exchange of fire that last 45 minutes,” said Froment.
The third threat is from poachers using an unidentified helicopter. Nine of the recently poached elephants had bullet wounds to the top of their heads and back and had been shot with military precision. In two recent attacks by helicopter, the tusks were removed with chainsaws and the brains and genitals were also targeted. These attacks are similar to a military-style helicopter attack two years ago that left 23 elephants dead in Garamba.
The escalated counter-poaching measures being rolled out by African Parks and ICCN include:
Collaboration with the regional military task force, which is being supported by AFRICOM (The United States Africa Command).
The establishment of forward operating bases at strategic points in the park and the manning of choke points to close down known poaching access routes.
The immediate construction of new roads, bridges and pontoon crossings across the park in order to facilitate the broader deployment of anti-poaching teams.
The extension of the park’s airstrip network and the intensification of aerial surveillance by the park’s two aircraft.
Bullet-proof reinforcement of trucks used to transport the anti-poaching teams as well as the park’s aircraft.
The extension of the current limited communications network throughout the park
In addition, a helicopter is being urgently sought for the rapid deployment of anti-poaching units in and around the park.
Last year, in anticipation of an escalation in poaching, African Parks invested heavily in anti-poaching equipment, communications systems, training and informer networks at Garamba, as well as training a specialised Rapid Response Unit to respond swiftly to severe poaching threats. “The current poaching crisis at Garamba, involving the use of heavy weapons and hand grenades against the park’s anti-poaching teams, now necessities an even more intensive anti-poaching effort,” said African Parks CEO Peter Fearnhead.
“This surge of poaching is unparalleled in the eight years that we have managed Garamba alongside ICCN,” said Fearnhead. “Garamba contains the largest remaining elephant population across this entire region of Africa and has therefore become a major poaching target. We do not underestimate the danger facing our rangers on the ground, but we are also determined to take whatever measure we need to protect our elephants.”
African Parks has managed Garamba in partnership with the DRC’s national park authority, ICCN, since 2005.
About African Parks: African Parks is a non-profit organisation that takes on total responsibility for the rehabilitation and long-term management of national parks in partnership with governments and local communities. African Parks operates seven national parks in six countries: the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Chad, Zambia and Malawi. Please see www.african-parks.org; https://www.facebook.com/AfricanParks
About ICCN: The ICCN (The Congolese Institute for Nature Conservation) is the Government authority responsible for the protected areas in the DRC. This includes national parks, forest reserves and designated hunting domains. Their mandate is to control and patrol these protected areas, collect and analyse field data and where possible facilitate tourism activities.
About Garamba National Park: Garamba National Park is situated in the north-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo bordering South Sudan. It was established in 1938 and became one of the first national parks in Africa. The total area of the Garamba complex, including the surrounding domaines de chasse (hunting zones) is 12,427 km2 of which 4,900km2 is the park itself. Its vegetation consists of vast undulating grasslands and extensive sections of forest, which is home to a large population of elephants that are a hybrid between savanna and forest elephant. The park contains the last remaining population of Kordofan giraffe in DRC and was the last recorded refuge for the northern white rhino, now considered extinct in the wild. Garamba was proclaimed a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1980.
About the LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army): The LRA is a militant Ugandan rebel group that originally operated in Uganda and South Sudan, and has been operational in the DRC since about 2006. Led by Joseph Kony, the LRA is responsible for widespread human rights abuses including murder, rape and the abduction of children to become sex slaves and child soldiers. Garamba has long been a stronghold of the LRA in DRC, whose insurgents have been almost permanently resident in the park and the adjoining Azande Domaine de Chasse (hunting zone) for the past eight years. In 2009, an LRA attack on Garamba’s park headquarters, left 15 park employees and family members dead and destroyed $1 million worth of infrastructure. Over the past two years, the LRA has increasingly become involved in elephant poaching to fund its operations, trading tusks for food, weapons, ammunition and other supplies.
12 June 2014
.JPG)
Catastrophic: The hearts of the mighty elephants have been stilled at last. Picture courtesy of African Parks
African Parks has intensified its anti-poaching efforts in eastern DRC to counter the poaching onslaught that has beset Garamba National Park in the past two months. A total of 68 elephants have been poached since mid-April, representing about 4% of the total population.
Sorry sight: Elephant skull indicating bullet hole from the air and ivory removed by chainsaw.Picture courtesy of African Parks
In mid-May, African Parks reported that 33 elephants had been killed in the five weeks prior, indicating a concerted attack on the park’s elephant population. Despite intensified anti-poaching efforts since then, the total has risen to 68 elephants in the past two months, at least nine of them shot from a helicopter. On one occasion hand grenades were used against the Park’s rangers by Sudanese poachers. For the first time the brains of elephants have also been removed, together with tusks and genitals.
African Parks’ investigations have revealed that the poaching is emanating from four different sources: Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA) insurgents, armed groups from South Sudan, poachers operating from a helicopter, and renegade members of the Congolese Armed Forces (FARDC). In the past few weeks Garamba’s anti-poaching teams have exchanged fire with several of these groups and five poachers have been killed. “The situation is extremely serious,” said Garamba park manager Jean-Marc Froment. “The Park is under attack on all fronts.”
Froment said that much of the poaching was being conducted by a new wave of LRA insurgents emanating from the thickly-forested Azande Domaine de Chasse (hunting zone) to the west of the park. Unlike previous encounters with the LRA, in which their weapons were old and ammunition limited, these groups have brand new weapons and ample supplies of ammunition.
The second threat comes from South Sudanese poachers, some of them wearing military uniforms, entering the Park from the north-east. “In one encounter, hand-grenades were used against our anti-poaching team in an exchange of fire that last 45 minutes,” said Froment.
The third threat is from poachers using an unidentified helicopter. Nine of the recently poached elephants had bullet wounds to the top of their heads and back and had been shot with military precision. In two recent attacks by helicopter, the tusks were removed with chainsaws and the brains and genitals were also targeted. These attacks are similar to a military-style helicopter attack two years ago that left 23 elephants dead in Garamba.
The escalated counter-poaching measures being rolled out by African Parks and ICCN include:
Collaboration with the regional military task force, which is being supported by AFRICOM (The United States Africa Command).
The establishment of forward operating bases at strategic points in the park and the manning of choke points to close down known poaching access routes.
The immediate construction of new roads, bridges and pontoon crossings across the park in order to facilitate the broader deployment of anti-poaching teams.
The extension of the park’s airstrip network and the intensification of aerial surveillance by the park’s two aircraft.
Bullet-proof reinforcement of trucks used to transport the anti-poaching teams as well as the park’s aircraft.
The extension of the current limited communications network throughout the park
In addition, a helicopter is being urgently sought for the rapid deployment of anti-poaching units in and around the park.
Last year, in anticipation of an escalation in poaching, African Parks invested heavily in anti-poaching equipment, communications systems, training and informer networks at Garamba, as well as training a specialised Rapid Response Unit to respond swiftly to severe poaching threats. “The current poaching crisis at Garamba, involving the use of heavy weapons and hand grenades against the park’s anti-poaching teams, now necessities an even more intensive anti-poaching effort,” said African Parks CEO Peter Fearnhead.
“This surge of poaching is unparalleled in the eight years that we have managed Garamba alongside ICCN,” said Fearnhead. “Garamba contains the largest remaining elephant population across this entire region of Africa and has therefore become a major poaching target. We do not underestimate the danger facing our rangers on the ground, but we are also determined to take whatever measure we need to protect our elephants.”
African Parks has managed Garamba in partnership with the DRC’s national park authority, ICCN, since 2005.
About African Parks: African Parks is a non-profit organisation that takes on total responsibility for the rehabilitation and long-term management of national parks in partnership with governments and local communities. African Parks operates seven national parks in six countries: the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, Rwanda, Chad, Zambia and Malawi. Please see www.african-parks.org; https://www.facebook.com/AfricanParks
About ICCN: The ICCN (The Congolese Institute for Nature Conservation) is the Government authority responsible for the protected areas in the DRC. This includes national parks, forest reserves and designated hunting domains. Their mandate is to control and patrol these protected areas, collect and analyse field data and where possible facilitate tourism activities.
About Garamba National Park: Garamba National Park is situated in the north-eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo bordering South Sudan. It was established in 1938 and became one of the first national parks in Africa. The total area of the Garamba complex, including the surrounding domaines de chasse (hunting zones) is 12,427 km2 of which 4,900km2 is the park itself. Its vegetation consists of vast undulating grasslands and extensive sections of forest, which is home to a large population of elephants that are a hybrid between savanna and forest elephant. The park contains the last remaining population of Kordofan giraffe in DRC and was the last recorded refuge for the northern white rhino, now considered extinct in the wild. Garamba was proclaimed a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 1980.
About the LRA (Lord’s Resistance Army): The LRA is a militant Ugandan rebel group that originally operated in Uganda and South Sudan, and has been operational in the DRC since about 2006. Led by Joseph Kony, the LRA is responsible for widespread human rights abuses including murder, rape and the abduction of children to become sex slaves and child soldiers. Garamba has long been a stronghold of the LRA in DRC, whose insurgents have been almost permanently resident in the park and the adjoining Azande Domaine de Chasse (hunting zone) for the past eight years. In 2009, an LRA attack on Garamba’s park headquarters, left 15 park employees and family members dead and destroyed $1 million worth of infrastructure. Over the past two years, the LRA has increasingly become involved in elephant poaching to fund its operations, trading tusks for food, weapons, ammunition and other supplies.
Thursday, June 12, 2014
PAN AFRICAN CIVIC EDUCATORS NETWORK (PACENET) Press Statement for immediate release 12th June 2014: CALL ON POLITICAL PARTIES TO NOMINATE AND VOTE FOR A FEMALE SPEAKER
The Pan African Civic Educators Network (PACENET), as one of the implementing
organizations of the 50-50 campaign, acknowledges efforts by political parties that have secured seats in Parliament. We would like to congratulate both women and men who have been elected as Members of Parliament to serve the five year term between 2014 and 2019.
In particular, PACENET would like to thank Malawians who supported the 50-50 campaign by voting for female candidates. Furthermore, PACENET recognizes in a special way, old female MPs who have retained their seats or have made a comeback into Parliament. This only demonstrates the confidence Malawians have in the female MPs.
Despite not achieving the 50-50 target, PACENET is convinced that the 32 female MPs in the current Parliament have the capacity to effectively represent their constituencies and interests of the female section of the Malawi population.
At this critical time when political parties represented in Parliament are in the process of coming up with their nominees for the positions of Speaker, First and Second Deputy Speakers, PACENET would like to make a special appeal to all political leaders to prioritize female MPs for the position of Speaker. We further appeal to all Legislators to support such nomination by voting overwhelmingly because as an organisation we believe this Parliament has an opportunity to write a new chapter in the history of Malawi Parliament by electing a female Speaker for the first time.
Given the possibility of a polarized Parliament, PACENET is convinced that by their nature of a motherly heart, soberness would prevail in the august House when it comes to deliberating matters of national interests. PACENET believes it should be easy to identify capable candidates for the position of Speaker among the female MPs.
LET US SUPPORT WOMEN
Signed
Steve Duwa
Executive Director-PACENET
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Misconceptions of An Article Entitled 'Donors Exposed'
PRESS RELEASE
(for Immediate release 10/06/2014)
The Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) wishes to correct several issues that were misrepresented in the article titled Donors Exposed that appeared in The Nation on Sunday of June 8, 2014.
First, the Commission finds the headline and contents of the article to be misleading and not a true reflection of the commitment and support which the Development Partners have rendered to MEC during the elections period. The article does not reflect the views of the Chief Elections Officer or the Commission.
The donors fulfilled their commitments in this process, and it is improper to attribute to them the challenges that were faced during the polling period.
Secondly, there is no one from the Commission that would support the assertion that the Development Partners have not met their financial commitments to the process. Monthly high-level meetings have been held with the Development Partners on the funding and progress of the elections. The donors have delivered what was agreed with the MEC and the Government of Malawi.
The donors committed to pay for the printing of ballot papers and essential polling materials, such as, ballot boxes, voting screens and indelible ink. The Commission together with UNDP worked out a schedule of procurement and delivery of the electoral materials and it all worked according to the agreed timelines. In the case of ballot papers they even came earlier than planned.
It is also not correct to allege that there were some shortages in the electoral materials that were supplied. The quantities of the materials procured were verified by the Commission and on every item there was a contingency provision.
The use of plastic pails in some centres cannot be attributed to the donors. This was because of logistical challenges that some councils faced during the polling phase. However, the Commission managed to deliver ballot boxes to such centres before the close of polling.
The Commission also wishes to put on record that it started distributing non-sensitive polling materials on May 6, 2014. Distribution of sensitive materials like ballot papers was done close to the polling day for security reasons and this was according to schedule.
The Commission would like to urge all electoral stakeholders to disregard the contents of the article as misleading and not a true reflection of the facts on the ground. The Commission acknowledges that challenges were faced in this election process and we are analyzing these issues to improve our processes and systems.
The Commission led and implemented the election process, and as Malawians, we should be, and are, accountable. Casting about for excuses is not the way forward. We can only improve with honest reflections on the process of these elections and this Commission welcomes such feedback. The article in The Nation does nothing but
serve to distract us from those responsibilities.
Willie Kalonga
Chief Elections Officer
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Announcement of The Determination of The Results for Parliamentary and Local Government Elections
June 2, 2014
Fellow Commissioners;
Representatives and leaders from Political Parties;
Distinguished Representatives of the Diplomatic Community and Development Partners;
Representatives of Observer Missions, both Domestic and international;
Representatives of Civil Society;
Staff of the Malawi Electoral Commission;
Distinguished members of the Media; and
Distinguished Guests;
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen:
On behalf of the Malawi Electoral Commission I am pleased to announce the results for the 2014 Parliamentary and Local Councilor elections.
The Electoral Commission has striven to ensure that every vote counts in these elections. This was a unique process, allowing for the concurrent election of the President and Vice President, 193 Parliamentary Seats for the National Assembly and 462 Councillor Seats across 35 Councils.
The organization of these elections is, as many of you know, one of the biggest and most complex operations undertaken in Malawi. The logistics and resources involved
are massive, as well as the efforts required to mobilize the population at large.
As such, we cannot and could not have organized these elections without the support of the government, the political parties, civil society organizations and the support of our international partners, who have also given their contribution to this massive effort.
We, as MEC, wish to congratulate and thank all Malawians for demonstrating their commitment towards Malawi’s democracy. We are grateful for the efforts and support
received from numerous groups that have enriched this process.
Across the country, non-governmental organisations, faith based organisations and community based organisations have worked hard in their communities to educate and mobilize voters. As you will shortly hear, these efforts have resulted in strong voter turnout.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In all races there has been more than one candidate, and there can only be one winner in each race. The competition has been vigorous. Allow me to take the opportunity to
highlight that the Commission appreciates the statements and actions of all competitors in accepting defeat in a dignified and peaceful manner.
This is indeed the warm heart of Africa. This is indeed our country.
For any competitor that feels they have a justifiable claim to challenge the results – within our laws, candidates have seven days in which to submit an electoral petition to the High Court.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
For Parliamentary elections a total of one thousand two hundred and ninety two (1,292) candidates from seventeen (17) parties and four hundred and seventeen (417) independent candidates competed. Two hundred and sixty one (261) of these candidates were women.
For Local Councilor elections two thousand four hundred and twelve (2, 412) candidates from eighteen (18) parties and five hundred and seventy six (576) independent
candidates have competed. Of these four hundred and nineteen (419) women competed.
In order to increase the participation of women as candidates, the Commission provided a 25% discount for nomination fees. Women are a crucial voice in our society.
The role and need for greater female representation has been a feature of many international and national observer reports.
As such, the Commission would use this opportunity to urge all political parties to do more for the representation of women through their party machinery in the period between elections. Women make up more than 50% of Malawians and should be well represented in every elected body throughout our land.
The results that we are about to announce show the interest and strength of participation that Malawians hold for all levels of government:
Ladies and Gentlemen, five million, two hundred and thirty four thousand, five hundred and six (5,234,506) votes were cast in parliamentary elections, representing 70.07% of
registered voters. Of these votes, seventy four thousand, six hundred and thirty-four (74,634) votes or 1.43% were deemed null and void.
For the Local Government Elections in the year of 2000, allow me to remind you that voter turnout was a mere 14%. In these elections five million, one hundred and fifty three thousand, nine hundred and ninety-three (5,153,993) votes were cast. This represents 68.99% of registered voters. Of these, one hundred and twenty-one thousand, one hundred and seventy votes (121,170) or 2.35% were deemed to be null and void.
The Commission is satisfied with the way the electoral process was conducted in an orderly, calm and peaceful manner. The level of null and void votes across all races was historically low for Malawi. Let me assure all voters that your Commission has done its best to act inclusively throughout the election period, honoring its commitment to Malawi’s citizens and all political parties. As has been noted in the
European Union’s Observation report, these elections have been transparent and inclusive to define solutions to address the challenges that arose.
This has not been an easy task, but again, one that we took with utmost seriousness. Since the 20th of May, until today, about 300 electoral Commission workers have been present here at the National Tally Center working on shifts to tally the results.
Others have lived through very challenging circumstances while implementing the election on the 20th of May and subsequent days.
As electoral workers and as Malawian citizens we have felt the pressure from the past few weeks. We have felt the eyes of the country on us. I would like to give a word of praise and recognize the efforts of the staff of the Electoral Commission
and the tens of thousands of temporary workers. Thank you for your work and dedication. The results to be announced are the fruit of your efforts and commitment.
It is important that we reflect on the difficulties found, and that we build on this knowledge. There are many lessons we wish to learn ourselves and impart to the next generation of election administrators so their future work is informed by our
current experience.
The Commission has worked diligently to assess each and every election result across all races. Where there has been any doubt we have investigated to be able to announce
results that are credible and genuine. Our determinations on these issues have been forged by a consensus of the Commission, and have therefore been endorsed by all
Commissioners.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a privilege to share with you the results tallied in this National Tally Center. Your elected Members of Parliament and Local Councilors have a critical role to play.
Collectively they will be able to identify the Nation’s and community’s needs, and set the goals and action-plans to meet those needs. There will always be competing priorities for limited resources. However, communities will have their voice heard through their duly elected representatives in Councils and the National Assembly.
I wish to congratulate the future Members of Parliament and Local Councilors. This Commission, wishes all the success to our Members of Parliament and Local Councilors in
achieving the goals set to enhance the prosperity of Malawi and Malawians during their tenure. May they find all the necessary support to fulfill their roles and their functions, and lead Malawi toward a bright future.
After the announcement of results, the processes of publication and taking office of Members of Parliament and new Local Councilors will follow.
Notice is hereby given that the following are the results arising from the National Assembly and Local Councilor Elections that took place in four hundred and fifty eight (458) wards and one hundred and ninety two (192) Constituencies.
Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to make the formal declaration of the Parliamentary results.
…
[Commissioners to Announce Parliamentary Determinations]
…
Ladies and Gentlemen, the formal declaration of the Local Government Elections is
…
ZODIAK radio and MBC Television will now announce the official results for the Local Government Elections.
Thank you and God Bless You
Fellow Commissioners;
Representatives and leaders from Political Parties;
Distinguished Representatives of the Diplomatic Community and Development Partners;
Representatives of Observer Missions, both Domestic and international;
Representatives of Civil Society;
Staff of the Malawi Electoral Commission;
Distinguished members of the Media; and
Distinguished Guests;
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen:
On behalf of the Malawi Electoral Commission I am pleased to announce the results for the 2014 Parliamentary and Local Councilor elections.
The Electoral Commission has striven to ensure that every vote counts in these elections. This was a unique process, allowing for the concurrent election of the President and Vice President, 193 Parliamentary Seats for the National Assembly and 462 Councillor Seats across 35 Councils.
The organization of these elections is, as many of you know, one of the biggest and most complex operations undertaken in Malawi. The logistics and resources involved
are massive, as well as the efforts required to mobilize the population at large.
As such, we cannot and could not have organized these elections without the support of the government, the political parties, civil society organizations and the support of our international partners, who have also given their contribution to this massive effort.
We, as MEC, wish to congratulate and thank all Malawians for demonstrating their commitment towards Malawi’s democracy. We are grateful for the efforts and support
received from numerous groups that have enriched this process.
Across the country, non-governmental organisations, faith based organisations and community based organisations have worked hard in their communities to educate and mobilize voters. As you will shortly hear, these efforts have resulted in strong voter turnout.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
In all races there has been more than one candidate, and there can only be one winner in each race. The competition has been vigorous. Allow me to take the opportunity to
highlight that the Commission appreciates the statements and actions of all competitors in accepting defeat in a dignified and peaceful manner.
This is indeed the warm heart of Africa. This is indeed our country.
For any competitor that feels they have a justifiable claim to challenge the results – within our laws, candidates have seven days in which to submit an electoral petition to the High Court.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
For Parliamentary elections a total of one thousand two hundred and ninety two (1,292) candidates from seventeen (17) parties and four hundred and seventeen (417) independent candidates competed. Two hundred and sixty one (261) of these candidates were women.
For Local Councilor elections two thousand four hundred and twelve (2, 412) candidates from eighteen (18) parties and five hundred and seventy six (576) independent
candidates have competed. Of these four hundred and nineteen (419) women competed.
In order to increase the participation of women as candidates, the Commission provided a 25% discount for nomination fees. Women are a crucial voice in our society.
The role and need for greater female representation has been a feature of many international and national observer reports.
As such, the Commission would use this opportunity to urge all political parties to do more for the representation of women through their party machinery in the period between elections. Women make up more than 50% of Malawians and should be well represented in every elected body throughout our land.
The results that we are about to announce show the interest and strength of participation that Malawians hold for all levels of government:
Ladies and Gentlemen, five million, two hundred and thirty four thousand, five hundred and six (5,234,506) votes were cast in parliamentary elections, representing 70.07% of
registered voters. Of these votes, seventy four thousand, six hundred and thirty-four (74,634) votes or 1.43% were deemed null and void.
For the Local Government Elections in the year of 2000, allow me to remind you that voter turnout was a mere 14%. In these elections five million, one hundred and fifty three thousand, nine hundred and ninety-three (5,153,993) votes were cast. This represents 68.99% of registered voters. Of these, one hundred and twenty-one thousand, one hundred and seventy votes (121,170) or 2.35% were deemed to be null and void.
The Commission is satisfied with the way the electoral process was conducted in an orderly, calm and peaceful manner. The level of null and void votes across all races was historically low for Malawi. Let me assure all voters that your Commission has done its best to act inclusively throughout the election period, honoring its commitment to Malawi’s citizens and all political parties. As has been noted in the
European Union’s Observation report, these elections have been transparent and inclusive to define solutions to address the challenges that arose.
This has not been an easy task, but again, one that we took with utmost seriousness. Since the 20th of May, until today, about 300 electoral Commission workers have been present here at the National Tally Center working on shifts to tally the results.
Others have lived through very challenging circumstances while implementing the election on the 20th of May and subsequent days.
As electoral workers and as Malawian citizens we have felt the pressure from the past few weeks. We have felt the eyes of the country on us. I would like to give a word of praise and recognize the efforts of the staff of the Electoral Commission
and the tens of thousands of temporary workers. Thank you for your work and dedication. The results to be announced are the fruit of your efforts and commitment.
It is important that we reflect on the difficulties found, and that we build on this knowledge. There are many lessons we wish to learn ourselves and impart to the next generation of election administrators so their future work is informed by our
current experience.
The Commission has worked diligently to assess each and every election result across all races. Where there has been any doubt we have investigated to be able to announce
results that are credible and genuine. Our determinations on these issues have been forged by a consensus of the Commission, and have therefore been endorsed by all
Commissioners.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
It is a privilege to share with you the results tallied in this National Tally Center. Your elected Members of Parliament and Local Councilors have a critical role to play.
Collectively they will be able to identify the Nation’s and community’s needs, and set the goals and action-plans to meet those needs. There will always be competing priorities for limited resources. However, communities will have their voice heard through their duly elected representatives in Councils and the National Assembly.
I wish to congratulate the future Members of Parliament and Local Councilors. This Commission, wishes all the success to our Members of Parliament and Local Councilors in
achieving the goals set to enhance the prosperity of Malawi and Malawians during their tenure. May they find all the necessary support to fulfill their roles and their functions, and lead Malawi toward a bright future.
After the announcement of results, the processes of publication and taking office of Members of Parliament and new Local Councilors will follow.
Notice is hereby given that the following are the results arising from the National Assembly and Local Councilor Elections that took place in four hundred and fifty eight (458) wards and one hundred and ninety two (192) Constituencies.
Ladies and Gentlemen, allow me to make the formal declaration of the Parliamentary results.
…
[Commissioners to Announce Parliamentary Determinations]
…
Ladies and Gentlemen, the formal declaration of the Local Government Elections is
…
ZODIAK radio and MBC Television will now announce the official results for the Local Government Elections.
Thank you and God Bless You
Two Suspects Arrested Over The Death of Dexter Chilunda, Head of Law Enforcement at Liuwa Plain National Park, ZambiaIA
NEWS RELEASE
2 June 2014
Killed in the course of his work: Chilunda
Two men have been arrested in connection with the killing of Dexter Chilunda, the head of law enforcement at Liuwa Plain National Park. Dexter was shot by suspected poachers while investigating gunshots heard by park rangers in the park on Friday, 23 May 2014.
The men were apprehended in the town of Lukulu, 35 kilometres from the park on Sunday, 1 June 2014, and are to appear in court at a date that has not yet been established.
.JPG)
Last respects: Officers say their last goodbyes to Chilunda
The arrests resulted from the combined efforts of the Zambian police, ZAWA and five Liuwa Plain law enforcement officers following leads by supportive local communities who were devastated by his death.
An experienced ranger and law enforcement officer with more than 20 years’ experience, Dexter Chilunda was on secondment to Liuwa Plain National Park from ZAWA. He was buried on Monday 26 May in Kaomo (250 kms from Liuwa). He leaves a wife and seven children who will be financially provided for in terms of a life insurance policy put in place by African Parks.
“The combined efforts of the Zambian police, ZAWA and the Liuwa Plain law enforcement unit that resulted in the arrests are to be commended, said African Parks CEO, Peter Fearnhead. “In addition, we are appreciative of the overwhelming support from local communities who assisted the investigating team. The arrests also send a strong warning message to poachers about the consequences of their activities.”
About African Parks: African Parks is a non-profit organisation that takes on total responsibility for the rehabilitation and long-term management of national parks in partnership with governments, wildlife organisations and local communities. We operate seven national parks in six countries: Chad, Rwanda,the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, Zambia and Malawi.
2 June 2014
Killed in the course of his work: Chilunda
Two men have been arrested in connection with the killing of Dexter Chilunda, the head of law enforcement at Liuwa Plain National Park. Dexter was shot by suspected poachers while investigating gunshots heard by park rangers in the park on Friday, 23 May 2014.
The men were apprehended in the town of Lukulu, 35 kilometres from the park on Sunday, 1 June 2014, and are to appear in court at a date that has not yet been established.
.JPG)
Last respects: Officers say their last goodbyes to Chilunda
The arrests resulted from the combined efforts of the Zambian police, ZAWA and five Liuwa Plain law enforcement officers following leads by supportive local communities who were devastated by his death.
An experienced ranger and law enforcement officer with more than 20 years’ experience, Dexter Chilunda was on secondment to Liuwa Plain National Park from ZAWA. He was buried on Monday 26 May in Kaomo (250 kms from Liuwa). He leaves a wife and seven children who will be financially provided for in terms of a life insurance policy put in place by African Parks.
“The combined efforts of the Zambian police, ZAWA and the Liuwa Plain law enforcement unit that resulted in the arrests are to be commended, said African Parks CEO, Peter Fearnhead. “In addition, we are appreciative of the overwhelming support from local communities who assisted the investigating team. The arrests also send a strong warning message to poachers about the consequences of their activities.”
About African Parks: African Parks is a non-profit organisation that takes on total responsibility for the rehabilitation and long-term management of national parks in partnership with governments, wildlife organisations and local communities. We operate seven national parks in six countries: Chad, Rwanda,the Democratic Republic of Congo, the Republic of Congo, Zambia and Malawi.
Monday, June 2, 2014
Voting, Vote Recount Principles
As electoral stakeholders, including political parties, continue to debate whether the May 20 Tripartite Elections were free and fair, and as the debate on whether a votes’ recount rages on, Zachimalawi can reveal that some international publications and legal experts acknowledge that voting and vote recounting is part of ensuring that the will of the people is not subverted.
A good case in point is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which advances the principle that citizens have a right “to vote in genuine elections”.
For instance, Article 25 of the ICCPR, signed by 152 nations, provides that: “Every citizen shall have the right and opportunity , without any of the deductions mentioned in Article 2 (which addresses issues of discrimination) and without unreasonable restrictions: (a) to take part in the conduct of public affairs directly or through freely chosen representatives; (b) to vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the will of the electors…”
And, according to the book ‘Recount Principles and Best Practices’- written by Mark Halvorson of Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota et al – one of the mechanisms of ensuring that the will of voters is not subverted is through vote recounts.
“Although recounts challenge us, they serve an important purpose in our democracy. Foremost, properly conducted recounts assure candidates and the public that in a close election, there has been a fair examination of the procedures and an accurate count of all legally cast votes,” reads the book in part, adding:
“Recounts can also help us improve election systems. Any shortcomings in our voting equipment, ballot design, and ballot processing are revealed by the scrutiny of a recount.”
The book observes, however, that recounts expose shortcomings in the administrative and security protocols and the overall pre-election planning.
It also observes that, to ensure that recounted votes are accurate, there is need to have voter-verifiable paper records, a water-tight ballot reconciliation system, and secure chain of custody.
“One essential component of a voting system’s accuracy, integrity, and security is a paper ballot or a voter-verifiable paper audit trail for every vote cast. This ensures that election officials have an independent record to confirm that the results produced by the voting system accurately reflect the actual votes cast and the intention of the voters,” the book reads in part.
It adds: “Thorough ballot accounting and reconciliation helps to ensure that the sum of the ballots used (including voted, spoiled, and unvoted) for a particular voting precinct matches the number of ballots assigned or delivered to a voting precinct. This process also involves verifying that the number of voters who have voted is neither greater nor less than the number of voted ballots, ensuring that no votes are lost and no votes are counted more than once.
“To safeguard against tampering and loss, paper ballots, records, and voting equipment should be fully secured and documented as to each individual who handled them, when they were handled, and for what purpose. Voting equipment and materials should be accounted for throughout the election administration process.”
An international Symposium held a couple of years ago under the theme, Identifying International Principles for Resolving Election Disputes’ also indicated that legal systems are key to the process of conducting trustworthy elections.
“Applying predictable rule-based decision-making, which is subject to judicial review, ensures that the recount process is reliable, trustworthy, and faithful to the actual voting record,” reads part of the findings by the symposium.
However, the book ‘International Election Principles: Democracy and the Rule of Law’ edited by John Hardin Young indicates that the issue of ballot papers’ safety and security remains divisive, owing to the fact that there are no internationally agreed standards on ballot design.
“Ballot design varies widely worldwide, and in some cases, such as in the US, even within a country. Organisations such as Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights note that ballot design should ‘avoid confusion’ but they offer little else in terms of international standards,” reads the book in part.
While all these processes are necessary, www.accuratedemocracy.com agues that the onus to reduce post-election conflicts is on candidates.
The website asks contestants in elections to develop policies that cater for every segment of the voters in a bid to avoid issues such as that of vote recount and that of voter aparthy.
“A policy needs good marks from voters on all sides. That is because every voter can rank it compared to other policies. So, all voters are ‘obtainable’ and valuable. This leads to policies with wide appeal,” reads a posting on the website.
The site also calls for Instance Runoff Voting, as opposed to the First-Past-The-Post System used in countries such as Malawi, to help voters settle for the candidate with the most appeal.
“Some Benefits of Instant Runoff Voting are: A majority winner from one election, so no winners-without-mandates and no costly runoff elections…;less divisive campaigns and attack ads, as a candidate tells rival factions why she is their best backup choice; No hurting your first choice by ranking a backup, as it does not count unless your first choice has lost; no lesser-of-two-evils choice, because you can mark your true first choice without fear of wasting your vote; (and) no split-vote worries for a faction, as votes for their weakest candidate move to each supporter's backup choice,” the website argues.
However, whether these observations will ring true in Malawi remains to be seen.
AUC Chairperson Congratulates Malawi for Successful Elections and Democratic Maturity
Congratulatory Message
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia – 31 May 2014. The Chairperson of the African Union Commission, H.E. Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma congratulates the people of Malawi for hosting peaceful and successful elections and reinforcing the country’s democratic maturity. The Chairperson praises Malawians’high sense of civic responsibility and demonstrated patience given the anxiety around the vote-tallying process and the final announcement of results of the 20 May 2014 tripartite elections.
Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma congratulates the President-elect, Peter Mutharika for his victory, and calls on him to work toward reconciling Malawians, bringing together those voted for him, or not, for the good of Malawi and the entire Africa.
While congratulating other political party contenders for their democratic maturity and placing national interest first, she encourages them to channel any grievances through appropriate non-violent and legal means to seek justice.
The Chairperson also congratulates the Malawi Electoral Commission, civil society organization, the media and other national and international stakeholders for remaining steadfast in protecting and promoting the Malawian democratic process, upholding the constitutional order and rule of law. This is the spirit that is required for building sustainable peace.
Jacob Enoh Eben
Ag. Spokesperson of the Chairperson
Announcement of Parliamentary and Local Government Elections Results Today Evening
The Malawi Electoral Commission will today announce official Parliamentary and Local Government Elections results Results at the National Tally Centre in Blantyre.
The event will start at 6 o'clock this evening.
The event will start at 6 o'clock this evening.
THE DPP MANIFESTO AND GENDER EQUALITY, WOMEN AND DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES IN MALAWI
NGO-GENDER COORDINATION NETWORK PRESS STATEMENT
NGO-Gender Coordination Network (NGO-GCN) is a grouping of gender and human rights NGOs who are active in promoting gender equality and equity including equal participation of women in political and public decision making positions.
The NGO-GCN would like to take this opportunity to congratulate His Excellency Professor Arthur Peter Mutharika and the Right Honourable Saulos Klaus Chilima of the Democratic People’s Party (DPP) on being elected President and Vice President respectively, of the Republic of Malawi.
The NGO-GCN is encouraged to note that the DPP pledged in their manifesto “to walk the talk and turn their development promises into real benefits for the people”. The NGO-GCN notes that there are a number of provisions in the DDP Manifesto which have a critical bearing on the enjoyment and realization of women’s rights in Malawi. The NGO-GCN therefore looks forward to the implementation of the promises that the DPP made in their 2014 Manifesto in relation to gender and participation of women in national development. The promises made by the DPP in their manifesto on gender, women
and development processes include the following:
EXTRACTS FROM THE DPP 2014 MANIFESTO
DPP Manifesto Principles and Guidelines: No person in Malawi will be denied basic rights, civil liberties and the rule of law. The Malawi Constitution will serve as the basis of the DPP’s political, economic and social transformation. The DPP shall adopt political structures in which all interest groups - the traditional chiefs, religious leaders, the business community, the teachers, the women, the youth, the elderly and the disabled, are fully represented and are given the voice at appropriate level in the
society.
Chapter 7 Public / Civil Service: The DPP will ensure gender balance and equality of opportunity in the public/civil service. On matters of recruitment, training and promotions, the DPP government will ensure that the numbers of men and women are comparable to one another. At leadership levels, the numbers shall be equal.
Chapter 11 Separation of Powers: The Executive: There will be established an effective Cabinet of 20 capable men and women, including Deputies, that will be accountable for their activities. A proper gender balance shall be observed to ensure women are fully represented in the National Assembly, the Cabinet, and the civil service and in all public institutions and organizations. The legislature: All efforts will be made to have as many women representatives in the legislature as possible, in line with the 50-50 representation that DPP committed to.
Chapter 22 Women and Development: The thrust of the DPP policy will be to accord women full recognition and unimpeded access to all aspects of Malawi's development. The DPP condemns the marginalization and discrimination of women in the development process. We shall, therefore, intensify programmes aimed at removing illiteracy, underemployment and exploitation of women. DPP shall also place the highest priority on increasing the number of women in responsible policy-making positions.
The DPP Government will not tolerate the abuse of women in any form including discrimination and gender based violence. Women will therefore be respected, protected and facilitated to play a more positive role in our country. Specifically, the following measures will be implemented:
Genuinely recognize women as equal partners in development in every field of economic and political endeavour and ensure that they are supported to become Company Executives, Board members, Members of Parliament and Cabinet Ministers just to mention a few;
Establish a clear national policy on women in development and in business;
Identify and disseminate information on new opportunities for women to increase trade in Malawi, Africa and the rest of the world;
Support the Gender Coordination Network, the National Association of Women in Business
and other women organizations to provide an enabling forum of women entrepreneurship in
commodity trade or trade-related services in banking and finance, insurance, transport, cargo operations, design, production development, to provide a new dimension for Malawi women in international trade;
Continuously review and enact strong legislation to prevent the abuse and battering of
women and to protect them from property grabbing and impoverishment of the women by
relatives following the death of a spouse.
Chapter 33 Guarantees and Safeguards: The DPP will continue to promote the role of women in business, in development and in the cultural heritage of our country. The DPP shall increase women representation in the Parliament, the Cabinet, the Civil Service and all aspects of Malawi's development.
The DPP will continue to encourage non-governmental organizations registered in Malawi to engage in a constructive dialogue with Government to enable them to play a more positive role in the development of our country.
The NGO-GCN welcomes this invitation to engage in constructive dialogue with the DPP led Government with regard to women’s rights as enshrined in the Malawi Constitution; ratified by the Malawi Government under the SADC Protocol on Gender and Development and other international legal instruments and as recently translated by the Malawi Gender Equality Act. The NGO -GCN looks forward to the DPP living up to the promises made in their Manifesto as highlighted above and wishes the President, Vice President and the new Government the best success.
Signed :Emma Kaliya, NGO-GCN Chairperson
Name: Victor Maulidi, Network Coordinator
Dated: 02 June, 2014
Announcement of Parliamentary and Local Government Elections Results Today Evening
The Malawi Electoral Commission will today announce official Parliamentary and Local Government Elections results Results at the National Tally Centre in Blantyre.
The event will start at 6 o'clock this evening.
Sunday, June 1, 2014
MESN PVT VALIDATES MEC’S OFFICIAL RESULTS
MESN Statement on Announcement of Official Presidential Results by the MEC
Delivered in Blantyre – 31 May 2014
Yesterday, 30 May 2014, the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) announced the official results for the presidential election. The Malawi Electoral Support Network (MESN), as part of our comprehensive observation effort for the 2014 Tripartite Elections, conducted a Parallel Vote Tabulation (PVT) exercise to provide independent verification of the accuracy of those results. The results announced by MEC track closely with data obtained by the PVT, and thus, MESN can state with confidence that despite the challenges which plagued the tallying process the official results for the presidential election are an accurate reflection of ballots cast.
The 2014 Tripartite Elections were observed by more than 10,000 observers drawn from Malawi, Southern Africa, across the continent and the broader international community. Not only MESN, but also the National Initiative for Civic Education (NICE), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the African Union (AU), the Commonwealth, and the European Union (EU) all have acknowledged shortcomings in the MEC’s conduct of the elections, but all have also clearly stated that these did not fundamentally undermine the integrity of the process.
Further, political parties deployed thousands of party agents to polling stations to witness setup, voting and counting. Most importantly, they were given an opportunity to sign the official presidential results form (MEC.060c). At the vast majority of polling stations agents from DPP, MCP, PP and UDF were present and signed these forms, showing across the political spectrum that despite the challenges on Election Day the process worked (see Appendix 3 for information on political party polling agents at polling streams signing the official results).
As MESN stated in its preliminary statement on 24 May, the 2014 Tripartite Elections have not been a step forward. In particular, there were serious challenges with: the production of the voter’s register; the delivery of materials to polling stations; and the tallying of results. While these issues did not ultimately undermine the credibility of the process, neither did they build public confidence in our democratic institutions. This was Malawi’s fourth election since the re-introduction of multiparty politics, and Malawians deserve better.
Following the elections there must be serious soul searching by all stakeholders, meaningful electoral reform, and tangible actions to ensure the 2019 elections meet the expectations of the Malawian people. As a first step, MESN urges the MEC to immediately release polling station results for all three elections (presidential, parliamentary and local councillor). This will help enhance transparency and start the process of rebuilding public confidence in the MEC.
PVT Findings
For each of the four top vote-getting candidates, the official result as announced by the MEC falls within the PVT estimated range. The PVT estimated Dr. Joyce Banda should receive between 18.2% and 21.8% of the vote, and she received 20.2% of the vote according to MEC’s official results. The PVT estimated Dr. Lazarus Chakwera should between 25.1% and 31.7% of the vote, and he received 27.8% of the vote according to MEC’s official results. The PVT estimated Atupele Muluzi should receive between 11.9% and 15.5% of the vote, and he received 13.7% of the vote according the MEC’s official results. The PVT estimated Prof. Peter Mutharika should receive between 32.7% and 39.3% of the vote, and he received 36.4% of the vote according to MEC’s official results. Thus, MESN can confidently and independently verify the accuracy of the official results as announced by the MEC.
MESN PVT Estimates for Presidential Election
(795 of 800 (99%) polling stations reporting with 922,219 valid votes cast)
Similarly, the MEC announced official turnout for the presidential election at 70.8%, which falls within the PVT estimated range of between 68.7% to 72.5%.
Concerns have been raised about the possibility of polling stations with turnout of over 100%. MESN’s PVT Observers did report that there were polling stations with turnout of over 100%, but this affected only 2% of all sampled polling stations and in most cases these were only small discrepancies. MESN PVT Observers reported another 2% of polling sampled stations with a turnout of between 95% and 100%. However, these polling stations with high turnout did not benefit any particular political party. The data from the PVT demonstrates that if the results for all of these polling stations were thrown out it would not change the outcome of the presidential election. MESN, however, would not recommend the votes from these stations be disregarded, unless further investigation reveals there are problems with those votes.
PVT Methodology
MESN deployed 800 trained and accredited PVT Observers to a representative random sample of polling stations, representing more than 1.3 million registered voters, located across all three regions, all 28 districts and all 193 constituencies (see Appendix 1 for distribution of MESN’s PVT Observers). MESN’s PVT Observers arrived at polling stations at 5am and observed the entire process starting with the setup of polling stations through voting and finally counting and the announcement of results for the polling stations. MESN PVT Observers recorded the official results as announced by the presiding officer and transmitted these to a central data centre by coded text message.
All PVT reports were verified for accuracy and have since been checked against the original paper PVT checklists. PVT Observers did not count any ballot papers themselves nor did they ask any voter how he/she voted. The PVT did not rely on any information from print or electronic media. It is an entirely independent exercise conducted solely by MESN with the intent of providing independent information on the accuracy of the official result of the presidential election regardless of the outcome.
The PVT methodology is based upon well-established and widely-accepted statistical principles. PVT’s are a common tool of citizen observation and have been conducted across Africa, including: Ghana, Kenya and Zambia. The PVT is not new to Malawi. The methodology was employed here in 1999 by the Church NGO Consortium and 2009 by MESN – in both cases the PVT verified the accuracy of the official results (see Appendix 2 for examples of results verification using PVTs from Africa).
Because the methodology involves collecting official results from a representative random sample, the PVT provides an estimated range within which each candidate’s percentage of the vote should fall within rather than a specific percentage of the vote for each candidate. The PVT methodology relies upon a sample to enable the highest standards to be employed in the recruitment and training of observers. This ensures the PVT provides the most reliable and accurate data possible.
The logic of the PVT is straight forward. If at any point in the official tallying process the results are manipulated in any way by anyone, then the PVT will expose this rigging as the official results will not be consistent with the PVT estimates. However, if the PVT estimates match the official results, then the contestants and the public should have greater confidence that the official results truly reflect the ballots cast at polling stations.
Conclusion
The 2014 presidential election has been challenging for our country and our democratic institutions. All elections test our collective resolve to democratic principles, but highly contested elections test them even more. Twelve candidates stood for president, but only one could win. Thus, from the outset eleven candidates and their supporters were destined to be disappointed with the results. The failings of the MEC have not made this disappointment any less bittersweet, but those failings did not affect the outcome of the presidential election.
If any candidate or political party feels aggrieved, they should follow the proper legal channels. All candidates and their supporters should continue to adhere to their obligations under the MEC’s Code of Conduct for Political Parties and Candidates which stipulates that they “shall publicly declare their commitment to accept the results of any election or challenge the results in court under the Electoral Law, Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act, Local Government Elections Act and the Constitution, as may be amended.”
With the MEC’s announcement of the official presidential results on May 30, 2014, the Malawian people have spoken. The winner should be magnanimous in victory and reach out to their former competitors to work together to improve the lives of all Malawians. At the same time, those candidates who were unsuccessful should remember that these are not our last elections, but only another step in our democratic development. Malawians will go to the polls again in 2019 and candidates and parties will have another opportunity to convince voters their policies are best for the country.
MESN calls on all candidates, their supporters and the general public to show political maturity; to remain calm and to maintain the peace. MESN continues to observe the process and will issue additional statements as appropriate as well as a final report on the entire process for the 2014 Tripartite Elections.
Signed
Steve Duwa
MESN BOARD CHAIRPERSON
MESN’s Methodology
MESN observes elections based on the Declaration of Global Principles for Nonpartisan Election Observation and Monitoring by Citizen Organizations. In assessing the conduct of elections, MESN looks at compliance by all stakeholders with our Constitution, Electoral Act and related laws as well as regulations and procedures set out by the MEC. MESN also draws upon Malawi regional and international commitments contained in the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections; the African Charter on Democracy, Elections, and Governance; the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and related protocols.
The data for this report is based primarily on observations from MESN’s 800 Parallel Vote Tabulation (PVT) Observers who were deployed to a representative random sample of polling stations across all three regions, all 28 districts and all 193 parliamentary constituencies. While MESN deployed nearly 7,000 total observers to encourage participation, deter problems and enhance transparency, the role of MESN’s 800 PVT Observers was to provide rapid information on the conduct of the election that is truly representative of the entire country. It is also information from these observers that will be used to verify the accuracy of the official results as announced by the MEC.
About MESN
Malawi Electoral Support Network (MESN) is a registered network of civil society organizations working on democratic governance and elections in Malawi. It is a registered member of Council for Non- Governmental Organizations (CONGOMA) in Malawi. It was formed in 2003 and has successfully participated in 2004 and 2009 Parliamentary and Presidential Elections in Malawi and currently has 27 members. It has also participated in election observer missions in the SADC regions and beyond. MESN is currently chair for SADC Electoral Support Network (SADC ESN) and founding member of the Global Network for Domestic Election Monitors (GNDEM). It comprises of non-governmental, faith-based and community – based organizations. The network works closely with Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC), other networks, development partners, political parties and eligible voters in ensuring that elections held in Malawi meet both local and international standards for acceptable democratic elections as a way of sustaining democratic governance in Malawi.
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Statement Attributable to The Spokesman for the Secretary-General on the Elections in Malawi
New York, 30 May 2014: The Secretary-General has been following closely the electoral process in Malawi and has taken note of the developments in the past few weeks, including the announcement of results on 30 May by the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC). At this critical juncture in Malawi, he urges all parties to continue to call for calm among their supporters, exercise restraint in the spirit of the Lilongwe Peace Declaration of 10 May, and respect the Constitutional provisions.
The Secretary-General calls on all candidates, political parties and their supporters to pursue any complaints or disputes arising from the electoral process through the existing legal mechanisms. He reiterates his call on political leaders to urge their supporters to work together to consolidate democracy and maintain stability in Malawi.
Mec Declares DPP's Peter Mutharika Winner
The Malawi Electoral Commission (Mec) on Saturday declared Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)'s presidential candidate, Peter Mutharika, president-elect at a highly-patronised event held at Comesa Hall in Blantyre.
Mec chairperson, Justice Maxon Mbendera, said Mutharika and his running mate Saulos Chilima were the president-elect and vice president-elect, respectively.
His announcement came after Rev. Ambassador Chimkwita Phiri anounced that Mutharika had polled 1,904,399 of the votes, representing 36.4 percent, followed by Malawi Congress Party's presidential candidate Lazarus Chakwera, who polled 1,455,880, representing 27.8 percent, while the incumbent Joyce Banda came third, with 1,056,236 votes, representing 20.2 percent. United Democratic Front's presidential candidate, Atupele Muluzi, came forth with 717, 224 of the votes, representing 13.7 percent.
Northern Region Vote
In the Northern Region, 848, 542 voters turned up on polling day and voted in the presidential election, of which 842, 962 were valid votes and 5,580 were declared null and void.
Of these, People's Party's Joyce Banda polled 448, 953 votes, representing 56.6 percent; MCP's Lazarus Chakwera came second with 180, 498, representing 22.8 percent; Mutharika polled 175, 850, representing 22.2 percent; while Atupele Muluzi polled 21, 938, representing 2.8 percent.
James Nyondo of the National Salvation Front polled 3, 800 votes (0.5 percent); Kamuzu Chibambo of People's Transformation Party 3, 596 (0.5 percent); John Chisi of Umodzi Party 2, 312 (0.3 percent); Mark Katsonga Phiri of the Peoples Progressive Movement 1, 556 (0.2 percent); Helen Singh of United Independence Party 1, 514 (0.2 percent); George Nnesa of Malawi Forum for Unity and Development 1, 195 (0.2 percent); Friday Jumbe of Nw Labour Party 1, 059 (0.1 percent), and; Aaron Davis Katsonga of Chipani Cha Pfuko 691 (0.1 percent).
Central Region Vote
In the Central Region, a total of 2, 118, 323 voters turned up and voted in the presidential election, of which 2, 096, 199 were valid votes and 22, 124 were declared null and void.
MCP's Chakwera got more votes than other presidential aspirants, polling 1, 208, 269 votes (56.3 percent); DPP's Mutharika came second with 430, 117 votes (20 percent); Joyce Banda of PP 272, 709 (12.7 percent); Atupele Muluzi of UDF 154, 353 (7.2 percent); Kamuzu Chibambo of Petra 8, 092 votes (0.4 percent); John Chisi 4,394 (0.2 percent); James Nyondo 3, 825 (0.2 percent); Mark Katsonga Phiri 3, 702 (0.2 percent); George Nnesa 3, 319 (0.2 percent); Helen Singh 2, 985 (0.1 percent); Friday Jumbe 2, 728 (0.1 percent), and; Aaron Davis Katsonga 1, 636 (0.1 percent).
Southern Region Vote
In the Southern Region- where 2, 318, 393 voters cast their ballots for presidential candidates, of which 2, 289, 422 votes were valid and 28, 971 votes were declared null and void- DPP's Mutharika came tops.
Mutharika polled 1, 298, 432 votes (56.7 percent); Atupele Muluzi polled 540, 963 (23.6 percent); Joyce Banda 334, 574 (14.6 percent); Lazarus Chakwera 67, 013 votes (2.9 percent); Mark Katsonga Phiri 10, 572 (0.5 percent); Kamuzu Chibambo 7, 672 (0.3 percent); George Nnesa 6, 528 (0.3 percent); John Chisi 5, 342 (0.2 percent); Hlen Singh 5, 169; Davis Katsonga 5, 126; Jumbe 5,032 (0.2 percent); James Nyondo 2, 998 (0.1 percent).
The percentages
In summary, Democratic Progressive Party's Peter Mutharika won with 36.4 percent of the vote, closely followed by Malawi Congress Party's Lazarus Chakwera with 27.8 percent of the vote. Joyce Banda of the People's Party got 20.2 percent, while Atupele Muluzi of the United Democratic Front captured 13.7 percent of the votes.
It is one of Malawi's most-contested presidential elections since the turn of multiparty politics of governance in 1994.
Parliamentary and Local Government Elections' results will be announced with the next 72 hours, with Mec indicating that it has tallied over 70 percent of the results.
Mec chairperson, Justice Maxon Mbendera, said Mutharika and his running mate Saulos Chilima were the president-elect and vice president-elect, respectively.
His announcement came after Rev. Ambassador Chimkwita Phiri anounced that Mutharika had polled 1,904,399 of the votes, representing 36.4 percent, followed by Malawi Congress Party's presidential candidate Lazarus Chakwera, who polled 1,455,880, representing 27.8 percent, while the incumbent Joyce Banda came third, with 1,056,236 votes, representing 20.2 percent. United Democratic Front's presidential candidate, Atupele Muluzi, came forth with 717, 224 of the votes, representing 13.7 percent.
Northern Region Vote
In the Northern Region, 848, 542 voters turned up on polling day and voted in the presidential election, of which 842, 962 were valid votes and 5,580 were declared null and void.
Of these, People's Party's Joyce Banda polled 448, 953 votes, representing 56.6 percent; MCP's Lazarus Chakwera came second with 180, 498, representing 22.8 percent; Mutharika polled 175, 850, representing 22.2 percent; while Atupele Muluzi polled 21, 938, representing 2.8 percent.
James Nyondo of the National Salvation Front polled 3, 800 votes (0.5 percent); Kamuzu Chibambo of People's Transformation Party 3, 596 (0.5 percent); John Chisi of Umodzi Party 2, 312 (0.3 percent); Mark Katsonga Phiri of the Peoples Progressive Movement 1, 556 (0.2 percent); Helen Singh of United Independence Party 1, 514 (0.2 percent); George Nnesa of Malawi Forum for Unity and Development 1, 195 (0.2 percent); Friday Jumbe of Nw Labour Party 1, 059 (0.1 percent), and; Aaron Davis Katsonga of Chipani Cha Pfuko 691 (0.1 percent).
Central Region Vote
In the Central Region, a total of 2, 118, 323 voters turned up and voted in the presidential election, of which 2, 096, 199 were valid votes and 22, 124 were declared null and void.
MCP's Chakwera got more votes than other presidential aspirants, polling 1, 208, 269 votes (56.3 percent); DPP's Mutharika came second with 430, 117 votes (20 percent); Joyce Banda of PP 272, 709 (12.7 percent); Atupele Muluzi of UDF 154, 353 (7.2 percent); Kamuzu Chibambo of Petra 8, 092 votes (0.4 percent); John Chisi 4,394 (0.2 percent); James Nyondo 3, 825 (0.2 percent); Mark Katsonga Phiri 3, 702 (0.2 percent); George Nnesa 3, 319 (0.2 percent); Helen Singh 2, 985 (0.1 percent); Friday Jumbe 2, 728 (0.1 percent), and; Aaron Davis Katsonga 1, 636 (0.1 percent).
Southern Region Vote
In the Southern Region- where 2, 318, 393 voters cast their ballots for presidential candidates, of which 2, 289, 422 votes were valid and 28, 971 votes were declared null and void- DPP's Mutharika came tops.
Mutharika polled 1, 298, 432 votes (56.7 percent); Atupele Muluzi polled 540, 963 (23.6 percent); Joyce Banda 334, 574 (14.6 percent); Lazarus Chakwera 67, 013 votes (2.9 percent); Mark Katsonga Phiri 10, 572 (0.5 percent); Kamuzu Chibambo 7, 672 (0.3 percent); George Nnesa 6, 528 (0.3 percent); John Chisi 5, 342 (0.2 percent); Hlen Singh 5, 169; Davis Katsonga 5, 126; Jumbe 5,032 (0.2 percent); James Nyondo 2, 998 (0.1 percent).
The percentages
In summary, Democratic Progressive Party's Peter Mutharika won with 36.4 percent of the vote, closely followed by Malawi Congress Party's Lazarus Chakwera with 27.8 percent of the vote. Joyce Banda of the People's Party got 20.2 percent, while Atupele Muluzi of the United Democratic Front captured 13.7 percent of the votes.
It is one of Malawi's most-contested presidential elections since the turn of multiparty politics of governance in 1994.
Parliamentary and Local Government Elections' results will be announced with the next 72 hours, with Mec indicating that it has tallied over 70 percent of the results.
Friday, May 30, 2014
Speech by MEC Chairman During Briefing With Stakeholders on May 29
PRESS STATEMENT
29 May 2014 (8pm)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Malawi Electoral Commission I am here to report on developments and progress towards the determination of the election results. The Commission has continued to work diligently on the process of complaints and verifying the Presidential results.
As a result of these efforts, the number of polling centers that we have identified which reported more than 100% voter turnout, has increased from 58 to 65 centers. For these cases, the MEC is closely auditing and cross-referencing the information to make a suitable determination.
For the Parliamentary and Local Government elections the MEC has continued to progress. So far more than 75% of the information has been verified and tallied. The Commission will be assessing its progress tomorrow, ensuring that its rigorous standards of verification are met. This may delay our announcement of Parliamentary and Local Government races. Under the law, the announcement of the determination of these races may be suspended for up to seventy-two (72) hours.
For the complaints that have been received by the Commission, two-hundred and forty-eight (248) have been processed. Of these, two-hundred and sixteen (216) have been resolved. In twenty-six (26) cases, further evidence has been requested, but no feedback has yet been received. And finally, in six (6) cases incomplete information was provided by the complainant.
We have also continued to consult with our stakeholders. In particular, the Commission met with the Malawi Human Rights Commission to discuss developments. Their support and advice is highly appreciated and valued by the Commission.
We have also met with delegations from several political parties to review their concerns. These discussions have been productive in clarifying issues and maintaining a constructive form of communication.
Too often, some stakeholders have preempted discussions with the Commission by communicating first through the media. By degrees, this has caused unnecessary confusion, rumors and misinformation – in particular, across the social media. As such, the Commission wishes to remind all stakeholders and in particular the media, to confirm information and avoid needless tension.
Our latest advice on the Court proceedings for a recount and the required extension of time to announce results, is that they are ongoing. As such, allow me to reiterate my statement to the Nation of yesterday. The Commission is continuing to prepare to announce its determination of the Presidential results tomorrow, in accordance with the law, or as the Courts may otherwise direct.
The Commission is also undertaking a full audit of the ballot boxes that have been retrieved from across the country. It has been reported to the Commission by the Chief Election Officer that ballot boxes from all locations have been collected to regional warehouses. Meanwhile, warehouse staff are completing a detailed audit and verification of all ballot boxes in storage.
The election law (section 119) requires that the official record of the election - including ballot papers - be preserved for 12 months afterward. As such, any person interfering with these ballot boxes will be liable to criminal prosecution.
Thank you and God Bless You.
Justice M. Mbendera, SC
Chairman
Malawi Electoral Commission
Blantyre
29 May 2014 (8pm)
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Malawi Electoral Commission I am here to report on developments and progress towards the determination of the election results. The Commission has continued to work diligently on the process of complaints and verifying the Presidential results.
As a result of these efforts, the number of polling centers that we have identified which reported more than 100% voter turnout, has increased from 58 to 65 centers. For these cases, the MEC is closely auditing and cross-referencing the information to make a suitable determination.
For the Parliamentary and Local Government elections the MEC has continued to progress. So far more than 75% of the information has been verified and tallied. The Commission will be assessing its progress tomorrow, ensuring that its rigorous standards of verification are met. This may delay our announcement of Parliamentary and Local Government races. Under the law, the announcement of the determination of these races may be suspended for up to seventy-two (72) hours.
For the complaints that have been received by the Commission, two-hundred and forty-eight (248) have been processed. Of these, two-hundred and sixteen (216) have been resolved. In twenty-six (26) cases, further evidence has been requested, but no feedback has yet been received. And finally, in six (6) cases incomplete information was provided by the complainant.
We have also continued to consult with our stakeholders. In particular, the Commission met with the Malawi Human Rights Commission to discuss developments. Their support and advice is highly appreciated and valued by the Commission.
We have also met with delegations from several political parties to review their concerns. These discussions have been productive in clarifying issues and maintaining a constructive form of communication.
Too often, some stakeholders have preempted discussions with the Commission by communicating first through the media. By degrees, this has caused unnecessary confusion, rumors and misinformation – in particular, across the social media. As such, the Commission wishes to remind all stakeholders and in particular the media, to confirm information and avoid needless tension.
Our latest advice on the Court proceedings for a recount and the required extension of time to announce results, is that they are ongoing. As such, allow me to reiterate my statement to the Nation of yesterday. The Commission is continuing to prepare to announce its determination of the Presidential results tomorrow, in accordance with the law, or as the Courts may otherwise direct.
The Commission is also undertaking a full audit of the ballot boxes that have been retrieved from across the country. It has been reported to the Commission by the Chief Election Officer that ballot boxes from all locations have been collected to regional warehouses. Meanwhile, warehouse staff are completing a detailed audit and verification of all ballot boxes in storage.
The election law (section 119) requires that the official record of the election - including ballot papers - be preserved for 12 months afterward. As such, any person interfering with these ballot boxes will be liable to criminal prosecution.
Thank you and God Bless You.
Justice M. Mbendera, SC
Chairman
Malawi Electoral Commission
Blantyre
Thursday, May 29, 2014
Mec Update on Tripartite Elections Results
PRESS STATEMENT
28 May 2014
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Malawi Electoral Commission I am here to report on developments and progress in the Tallying of the election results. The law requires the Commission to announce its determination of the national election results within 8 days from the last day of polling.
As you will recall, our last day of polling was on Thursday, 22 May. Therefore the Commission has a legal duty to announce the results not later than Friday, 30 May, 2014. The law allows the Commission to announce the results within 48 hours after collecting all relevant information.
This 48 hours is provided to allow the Commission to attempt to resolve any complaints that have been lodged. As of this afternoon the Commission has registered 287 complaints of which it has processed 188.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I can now report to the Nation that the Commission has received and tallied all of the results for the Presidential election at the National Tally Centre.
As such, the 48 hour countdown has started and the Commission will announce the determination of official results for these elections on Friday, 30 May.
The Commission will utilize the remaining two days to finalize and resolve the complaints it has received for the Presidential, Parliamentary and Local Council Elections.
If all complaints cannot be resolved within the remaining time, candidates will still be able to take up any concern via a petition to the High Court, within seven days of the announcement of the results, as the law provides for.
The Commission has also continued with the verification of the results. We are working diligently to identify any irregularities. This includes the 58 polling centers where the number of valid votes reported to have been cast have exceeded the number of registered voters.
These issues will be commented on in our report to the Nation on the announcement of the determination of results.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We are all aware of the legal controversy that has surrounded the possibility of the Commission conducting a recount.
At this stage we await clarity from the Courts on this issue, as they seek to resolve the injunctions and counter-injunctions being lodged.
On this issue, the Commission has met with many of the stakeholders in the electoral process. In the past few days we have met with the Secretaries-General of the political parties, PAC – the Public Affairs Committee – Civil Society Organizations, and election observer groups.
To all of these groups I must extend my sincere gratitude for their commitment and support to the Commission as we have all wrestled with these issues. Our advice to these stakeholders is that it is not feasible for the Commission to conduct a full recount within the period available to it, and if it were possible, a Court order would be required to extend the period for announcement of results.
Malawians are a law abiding people. We are known as the warm heart of Africa. The commitment of all Presidential candidates through the Lilongwe Peace Declaration confirms these sentiments.
The Commission is preparing to announce its determination of the results of these elections on Friday, 30 May, or as the Court may direct.
Thank you.
Mec Update on Election Results Announcement
PRESS STATEMENT
28 May 2014
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the Malawi Electoral Commission I am here to report on developments and progress in the Tallying of the election results. The law requires the Commission to announce its determination of the national election results within 8 days from the last day of polling.
As you will recall, our last day of polling was on Thursday, 22 May. Therefore the Commission has a legal duty to announce the results not later than Friday, 30 May, 2014. The law allows the Commission to announce the results within 48 hours after collecting all relevant information.
This 48 hours is provided to allow the Commission to attempt to resolve any complaints that have been lodged. As of this afternoon the Commission has registered 287 complaints of which it has processed 188.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I can now report to the Nation that the Commission has received and tallied all of the results for the Presidential election at the National Tally Centre.
As such, the 48 hour countdown has started and the Commission will announce the determination of official results for these elections on Friday, 30 May.
The Commission will utilize the remaining two days to finalize and resolve the complaints it has received for the Presidential, Parliamentary and Local Council Elections.
If all complaints cannot be resolved within the remaining time, candidates will still be able to take up any concern via a petition to the High Court, within seven days of the announcement of the results, as the law provides for.
The Commission has also continued with the verification of the results. We are working diligently to identify any irregularities. This includes the 58 polling centers where the number of valid votes reported to have been cast have exceeded the number of registered voters.
These issues will be commented on in our report to the Nation on the announcement of the determination of results.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
We are all aware of the legal controversy that has surrounded the possibility of the Commission conducting a recount.
At this stage we await clarity from the Courts on this issue, as they seek to resolve the injunctions and counter-injunctions being lodged.
On this issue, the Commission has met with many of the stakeholders in the electoral process. In the past few days we have met with the Secretaries-General of the political parties, PAC – the Public Affairs Committee – Civil Society Organizations, and election observer groups.
To all of these groups I must extend my sincere gratitude for their commitment and support to the Commission as we have all wrestled with these issues. Our advice to these stakeholders is that it is not feasible for the Commission to conduct a full recount within the period available to it, and if it were possible, a Court order would be required to extend the period for announcement of results.
Malawians are a law abiding people. We are known as the warm heart of Africa. The commitment of all Presidential candidates through the Lilongwe Peace Declaration confirms these sentiments.
The Commission is preparing to announce its determination of the results of these elections on Friday, 30 May, or as the Court may direct.
Thank you.
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
THE STATE OF 2014 TRIPARTITE ELECTIONS IN MALAWI AS OF TUESDAY 27TH MAY 2014
FROM THE STATE HOUSE PRESS OFFICE
Political developments in the past few days have been challenging to Malawians and have put to test the country’s democracy and governance institutions. These developments, however, have to be put into context.
Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda has always been committed to issues of democracy, good governance and transparent Government since her accession to the Presidency on 7th
April 2012. The President pursued an inclusive, open and participatory Government that respected the Constitution and the rule of law. The same spirit has been demonstrated in the run-up to the elections, when she levelled the political playing field to all
political parties. The President and her Government has managed to heal the country from previous tension and divisions; recovered the economy from near collapse and laid strong foundation for sustainable growth.
The President opened up the public broadcaster, Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) to all political players; she did not use the state machinery at her disposal to block, interfere, threaten or ban political activities of all contesting parties as has been the trend since 1994.
Malawians ought to remember that previous administrations used District Commissioners and Police to achieve these unacceptable acts. Even though some opposition parties instigated political violence in some instances, Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda always urged her supporters to remain calm and refrain from violence. As a matter of ensuring that the Tripartite Elections were credible, she consulted all major political
stakeholders in constituting the Malawi Electoral Commission. Indeed, the Electoral Commission is inclusive of all major political parties that were represented in Parliament.
During her two-year tenure of office, Dr Joyce Banda ensured that Malawi should be and it really is among the most media friendly countries in Africa where freedom of expression is not suppressed. Reputable international commentators have named Malawi as the most media friendly country in Africa.
Prior to the polling date, some opposition elements and some ill-willed commentators propagated in the media that Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda and her People’s Party (PP) were planning to rig the elections.
However, in a meeting with the Faith Community Leaders, Her Excellency emphasized that neither PP nor her government had any intention to rig the elections. However, those propagating this were in fact trying to drive people’s attention away from their own evil intentions to rig the elections by creating a false impression that the ruling party was planning to rig the elections.
Under Her Excellency’s leadership, the country experienced peaceful voting though with some instances where polling materials were not delivered on time or inadequate. In other cases, wrong materials were delivered. This led to some isolated cases of violence in some parts of Blantyre and Lilongwe, for example, which in turn led to voting being extended to next two days.
Notwithstanding that voting was continuing for the next two days in some polling centres, the media accredited by Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) continued to announce the unofficial results while voting was still progressing in the said affected areas. Although many stakeholders demanded that official broadcasters stop announcing the unofficial results while voting was still on-going, announcements continued nevertheless.
There have been reports that some monitors in some polling centres were chased by police and MEC officials, mainly teachers and police officers, even before sealing of ballot papers while in other cases a systematic pattern was emerging that polling staff were influencing voters to vote for certain candidates. These polling officers, mainly teachers and police officers, have now been exposed some of whom have confessed that they were induced with monetary rewards by a certain Presidential candidate.
With the foregoing in mind, it was not surprising when revelations of serious
irregularities started emerging; these irregularities had mostly four (4)
patterns.
1)Tallies from some constituencies were deliberately altered where figures were inflated to favour certain candidates as in Machinga North East where 38,778 registered voters were recorded while the tally was purposely inflated to purport that 184,223 had voted, figures inflated in favour of a particular candidate; (evidence
available);
2)Tallies from polling centres where figures were deliberately erased, tippexed, configured and accordingly adjusted to favour certain candidates, (evidence available);
3)Purported locally printed ballot papers without security features were pre-marked for a certain candidate and staffed in washing baskets, plastic pails and cartons and were ferried to polling centres while monitors were financially induced by polling officers to leave the polling centres while counting progressed. Most of these tallies were not signed and counter-signed by the monitors as required, (evidence available);
4)Some Presiding Officers from one polling centre signed for three different polling centres and in all cases, the figures for a certain candidate were almost the same.
As these challenges were becoming apparent, it was learnt that the Information Management System designed to manage elections results was hacked into and crushed.
The election stakeholders started raising alarm and the following were raised;
a) That announcing of the unofficial results be discontinued,
b) That the Electoral Commission embarks on manual counting and verification to address the irregularities as presented by electoral stakeholders.
To add to these voices, Her Excellency the President called upon Malawi Electoral Commission to recount the votes and address the irregularities that had been registered by the stakeholders.
The Malawi Electoral Commission Chairman rudely responded to these calls as “Cries of losers” and disregarded all the complaints as raised by political parties and other electoral stakeholders. Soon thereafter, wide revelations of rampant and serious irregularities in the electoral process started flooding the public domain.
It then became public knowledge that indeed the electoral process had been defrauded. Despite this public outcry and threats of violence from some political parties, the Malawi Electoral Commission Chairperson was intransigent, insensitive and non-responsive to the unfolding events.
At this time, it became apparent that the Malawi Electoral Commission had lost control of their own process; were not able to provide leadership in announcement of results and had lost control of election data notwithstanding that accredited media were still announcing the unofficial results and that tension was brewing in the country.
At this point, Electoral Stakeholders including some Presidential candidates
approached the President, Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda to rise above politics and provide direction for the country. Hence, Her Excellency the President issued a Presidential Proclamation on Saturday 24th May 2014, four days after voting to nullify the electoral process due to serious irregularities that had emerged and the State President determined that fresh elections be held in 90 days. Her Excellency The State President used the powers vested in her, under Section 88 (2) to provide Executive
Direction in the interest of national unity and security.
The immediate reaction to this proclamation by certain sectors of the society who felt were going to benefit from the serious electoral irregularities was negative.
However, four hours after the proclamation, the Malawi Electoral Commission came public to address the nation admitting that the electoral process could indeed not be relied upon, and the electoral data could was not trustworthy and therefore could not provide a credible platform for announcement of results.
Secondly, the Commission requested the nation to give them an allowance of 30 days to physically verify the ballot papers and conduct the recount of the votes to remedy the many irregularities the Commission had come across.
This admission by the Commission vindicated the Presidential Proclamation that had just been issued and further comforted the public as it was now evident that the Commission had started listening and acting in the national interest.
In a similar show of support, one of the broadcasting houses that was accredited to announce the election results, Zodiak Broadcasting Station (ZBS), five hours after the proclamation, went public retracting that the electoral results they were announcing were unverified, could not be relied upon hence should be disregarded.
It became evident that the Presidential Proclamation had calmed the citizens and it brought hope of a peaceful and credible resolution to the irregularities of the electoral process.
Despite the public excitement that this development brought to the nation, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and their network obtained three injunctions restraining Malawi Electoral Commission from proceeding with the recounting and verification exercise. Malawi Electoral Commission and Malawi Law Society also obtained injunctions against the President’s Proclamation.
These many injunctions brought confusion to the direction of the whole electoral process and demonstrated that the credibility of the electoral process had been destroyed leaving the expectations of Malawians heavily eroded.
After extensive public debate and Stakeholders’ consultations, Malawi Electoral Commission announced to the nation on 26th May 2014 that they are convinced that the data available could be relied upon and therefore will not announce the results of the elections until a full recount and verification had been done; they further announced that they will take 30 days to carry out this exercise. This announcement by the Commission brought comfort and relief to the Malawi populace that the call by Her
Excellency The President Dr Joyce Banda was now being heeded to.
Despite this new welcoming decision by Malawi Electoral Commission, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is still bent on frustrating this development which has been thoroughly discussed and agreed upon by Election Stakeholders and welcomed by the whole nation. The question in the people’s minds is why is the DPP still refusing the welcome development accepted by all stakeholders?
If indeed the DPP has won legitimately, why not wait for the audit process to finish so that they form the next government on a clean sheet? Reference can made to several commentaries and expert opinion some of which are attached.
EXPERT LEGAL OPINION
Legal View of a Private Practice Lawyer, Shepher Mumba of Golden & Law
"I have been reading the Constitution and the Parliamentary & Presidential Elections Act since yesterday and I do not find any provision preventing Malawi Election Commission (MEC) from conducting a recount of the votes. Amongst others, the function of MEC is to "determine electoral petitions and complaints related to the conduct of any elections" see s.76(2) of the Constitution. Further, s113 of the PPE states that "any complaint submitted in writing alleging any irregularity at any stage, if not satisfactorily resolved at a lower level of authority, shall be examined and decided on by the Commission and where the irregularity is confirmed the Commission shall take necessary action to correct the irregularity and the effects thereof" Recounting of votes is therefore within the functions and mandate of the MEC as provided by law.
Legal expert opinion by Bright Theu, legal expert at African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights in The Gambia.
MEC has power to undertake vote recount
There is a notion which as I gather has been endorsed by the High Court to the effect that the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) has no power/mandate/competence to order and undertake a “recount of the votes”. Below I advance the view that this notion is wholly misinformed; based on a deliberate circumvention of clear legal provisions and trite principles of interpretation; based on faulty reasoning; and probably induced by personal interest in the outcome of the issue the nation is contending with.
I argue for the position that MEC has every mandate to “determine” the outcome of an election and to use all appropriate methods available at its disposal for that purpose. I am open to contrary views that are informed by sound reasoning and proper application of the relevant principles that bear on the issues, in the spirit of an organised dialogue and not aimless bubbling.
Theu: MEC has the mandate to undertake vote recount
Theu: MEC has the mandate to undertake vote recount
To begin with, MEC is established under section 75 of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. The duties, powers and functions of MEC are stipulated mainly under the Constitution (Constn), the Electoral Commission Act (ECA), and the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act (PPEA). Among the duties, powers and functions of MEC, section 8(1)(m) of ECA empowers MEC to “TO TAKE MEASURES AND TO DO SUCH OTHER THINGS AS ARE NECESSARY FOR CONDUCTING FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS.”
Further, section 76(2)(c) of the Constitution sanctions that MEC shall, among other duties and functions, “DETERMINE ELECTORAL PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS RELATED TO THE CONDUCT OF ANY ELECTIONS” (s.76(2)(c), Constn). The critical term “determine” which articulates the duty and the attendant power of MEC is not defined in the Constitution. In fact it need not be defined because it is a well-known term which simply means decide, rule, judge, issue a verdict on any issue submitted to a competent body for that purpose.
In other words, to determine is to examine or assess an issue or a complaint in terms of the evidence presented and the applicable law with a view to deriving the conclusion as to whether the complaint is valid or not. Where the complaint is found to be invalid, the natural result is that is it dismissed. Where on the other hand the complaint is determined to be valid, naturally and logically an effective remedial measure is taken or issued and this forms part of the determination.
Accordingly, to the extent that MEC has the duty and function of “determining” electoral petitions and complaints, it is perfectly competent to decide whether any complaint it has received is valid and if so it has the attendant power to take or issue an effective remedial measure. For purposes of an election (MEC’s business) an effective remedial measure is one that ensures that the result of an election is credible in the sense that all irregularities that would adulterate and impair the validity of the outcome of the election are removed or mitigated to a level that they are insignificant to the outcome.
The idea is to make sure as much as possible that the result of the election is nothing but the people’s choice. This is the only way of ensuring that the authority to govern Malawi is validly entrusted, and not fraudulently assumed by any individual or group of individuals – and this is the higher constitutional value that any process and any measure taken by MEC seeks or must seek to achieve.
Indeed the process of “determining” electoral petitions and complaints must uphold that higher value, without which we risk being governed by a group of individuals who purport to acquire the mandate to govern by fraud!
From the above, it should be beyond rational contention that MEC has the duty and function to “determine electoral petitions and complaints”(s.76(2)(c), Constn) which includes the attendant power to take effective remedial measures (s.8(1)(m), ECA) where a given complaint is determined to be valid and of such gravity as to affect the validity of the outcome.
Whether “recounting the votes” is among the range of effective remedial measures MEC can take is the second point I address, since it is this particular measure that some people deny MEC the competence to opt for, a denial the Court has erroneously endorsed!
Trite principle of justice would have it that where there is a wrong there must be some measure adopted to right the wrong.
In more exact terms, we say where there is a wrong there must be a remedy. It is a principle that commands judicial authority. No civilised mind would raise any serious contention against that principle. In the case of electoral complaints which have been determined to be valid and of sufficient gravity as to adulterate and impair the validity of the outcome of the election, the remedial measure must seek to remove that impairment, or mitigate it to an insignificant size.
An electoral outcome is impaired or adulterated if it results from a combination of circumstances which defeat the people’s true choice (se “A”) by instead fraudulently making choice “B” appear as the people’s choice. The remedial measure will be effective if it is capable of expunging all factors that contribute to the masking of any candidate (e.g. “B”) as the people’s choice.
The means or necessary measures of expunging or mitigating irregularities are neither expressly stipulated nor limited under the laws that govern MEC’s mandate. Indeed there is no provision which restricts the measures that MEC can adopt to remedy an irregularity.
Rather and interestingly, section 113 of the PPEA simply and broadly states that “any complaint submitted in writing alleging any irregularity at any stage, if not satisfactorily resolved at a lower level of authority, shall be examined and decided on by the Commission and WHERE THE IRREGULARITY IS CONFIRMED THE COMMISSION SHALL TAKE NECESSARY ACTION TO CORRECT THE IRREGULARITY AND THE EFFECTS THEREOF.” This is important to note because it entails that MEC has fairly wide latitude to determine and adopt the appropriate and effective measure where it finds a given complaint or petition to be valid and of significant proportion.
On this point, I gather that those who advance the view that MEC has no competence to order and undertake a recount draw that conclusion from section 114(4) of the PPEA. Section 114 deals with appeals against determinations of MEC on electoral petitions and complaints. The determination against which an appeal can be lodged to the High Court are those mandated under, among others, section 76(2)(c) of the Constitution and section 113 of the PPEA (quoted immediately above).
For purposes of reviewing the determinations of MEC, section 114(1) states that “an appeal shall lie to the High Court against a decision of [MEC] confirming or rejecting the existence of an irregularity At s.114(4), the PPEA MERELY provides that “the High Court shall have power to direct scrutiny and RECOUNTING of votes if it is satisfied, during proceedings on an election petition, that such scrutiny and recount are desirable.”
There are a few points to note on s.114(4) of the PPEA. Firstly, it does not exclusively arrogate to the High Court the power to direct a RECOUNT or scrutiny. Secondly, it should not take someone reading volumes on process philosophy to figure that the High Court’s power procedurally only comes into play on review of determinations of MEC.
MEC would have to make its own determinations first and it is these determinations that would be reviewed by the High Court upon which the High Court may then direct a RECOUNT, as one of the possible remedial measures which the Court may find desirable.
I repeat, there is nothing in s114(4) of PPEA that exclusively arrogates to the High Court the power to direct a recount, a thing the High Court can only do upon a review of the determination of MEC. Put differently, there is nothing in s114(4) of PPEA prohibiting MEC or limiting MEC’s wide latitude to TAKE NECESSARY ACTION TO CORRECT THE IRREGULARITY AND THE EFFECTS THEREOF (s.113, PPEA).
How the Court can find that MEC has no mandate to adopt as a necessary measure the recount of the votes or such other measures of scrutiny to correct the irregularities it confirms is unclear. For the Court to come to such a conclusion, it would have to deliberately ignore the above quoted provisions and deliberately stretch s114(4) of the PPEA to mean and only mean that it (the High Court) has the mandate to order a recount.
Even at the risk of an overkill, section 114(4) of PPEA does not restrict MEC’s power to take necessary action to correct irregularities and the effects thereof! Procedurally, what the Court can do under s114(4) of the PPEA only follows after what MEC will have done under s.113 of the PPEA among other provisions.
I wish to conclude by saying that in tackling the issues that beset us as a nation regarding the election, we must seek to uphold the profound principle that the authority to government Malawi must validly derive from the people of Malawi and genuinely vest in a group of individuals who are the peoples’ choice determined by real votes cast in favour such individuals and not by some fraudulent means that mask given candidates as the people’s choice. That is the higher constitutional value that we must seek to uphold.
With a mind that is clogged with immediate personal interests, it is not possible to perceive and conceive that higher constitutional value and seek to uphold it. So what informed the Court’s decision that MEC has no power to adopt a recount as a measure for correcting irregularities that it has confirmed to be valid and substantial? Let people of good conscience decide for themselves.
• Bright Theu is former Malawi Law Society (MLS) secretary general and a private practicing lawyer
OPINION BY AN UNKNOWN LAWYER QUOTED BY STATE HOUSE
Malawian incompetence has reached it's apotheosis in the organization of these elections. I expected there were going to be problems this being the first time we are having tripartite elections. But I anticipated the problems were gonna come from the large volumes of candidates and complaints etc. never from registration and actual polling. I would give this Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) 1 out of 10. The only thing they've done well, and I really think it's more a result of Joyce Banda's tolerance than MEC doing, is the better coverage of opposition parties in the public media since 1994 when access to these was free for all. Otherwise, there's been no election here. Where I went to observe polling there were no voting materials until 10, not even chairs. A young man seeing my ID accosted me when I arrived and asked me to tell him what he was to do. He was a poll worker but hadn't been trained. Around 11 o'clock attempts were made to commence voting. Only 3 of the 21 ballot boxes had seals. And these seals had no serial numbers. How does one ensure the integrity of the vote under those circumstances? Fortunately the voters protested. Further there was very little indelible ink which would mean that after some time either voting was going to be suspended or would be allowed to continue without evidence of voting. Lots of people who had voter registration cards were not on the voters roll and a parallel register was to be provided where their details would be recorded. Eventually after 4 hours of waiting I left for another centre. I found people rioting there and couldn't stay as I feared they might mistake me for a poll worker.
Malawi has, since 1993, on it's statute books the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act. Faute de mieux it is the operation manual for the electoral process. Life has been made easy. Follow it and MEC is home and dry. In my opinion, on polling day, none of its provisions was respected. Can you imagine voting is still happening in some centers till now? In some places voting closed at 11 and counting could only happen the following day. How can anyone trust the results declared in such an election when there were no seals on the ballot boxes and even where there were seals theses had no serial numbers? When I stopped communicating with MEC people last night, their IT system wasn't working. They hadn't received results yet. In short the owners of the electoral process itself are having to hear the results from radio like the rest of us. There have been reported cases of tampering with results sheets, poll officials campaigning for the DPP candidates etc. how can the whole system just die? On this day? This is a system that has worked pretty well since 1993. Can MEC determine the result on the basis of radio announcements? Of course not. Determination of the results is a meticulous legal process that involves counting the ballot papers according to law, tallying of the results, reconciliation of the ballot papers, resolution of complaints to the satisfaction of complainants etc.
So where to Malawi? Personally, my opinion is that these elections have been mired in so much intrigue that no right thinking member of this or any society can vouch for their integrity. They should therefore be declared null and void and MEC should start afresh. MEC should either resign or be dismissed and a new one appointed to manage the new process; if that's asking for too much then as a compromise, MEC should abandon its IT system and do a manual count of the results and especially recounting the ballot papers and allowing political parties to take part. Making sure that what's in the ballot box is what the declared result is.
The first option poses a constitutional crisis. The president's and parliament's mandate is over. How do we extend her rule? How will we amend section 67 of the constitution to allow a new election date to be appointed? How will the president dismiss the MEC and appoint a new one without parliament? Can we call the old parliament? I don't think so but I'm sure we may be able to find some provision under the General a Interpretation Act.
ISSUED BY
STATE HOUSE PRESS OFFICE
KAMUZU PALACE, LILONGWE
27TH MAY 2014
Political developments in the past few days have been challenging to Malawians and have put to test the country’s democracy and governance institutions. These developments, however, have to be put into context.
Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda has always been committed to issues of democracy, good governance and transparent Government since her accession to the Presidency on 7th
April 2012. The President pursued an inclusive, open and participatory Government that respected the Constitution and the rule of law. The same spirit has been demonstrated in the run-up to the elections, when she levelled the political playing field to all
political parties. The President and her Government has managed to heal the country from previous tension and divisions; recovered the economy from near collapse and laid strong foundation for sustainable growth.
The President opened up the public broadcaster, Malawi Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) to all political players; she did not use the state machinery at her disposal to block, interfere, threaten or ban political activities of all contesting parties as has been the trend since 1994.
Malawians ought to remember that previous administrations used District Commissioners and Police to achieve these unacceptable acts. Even though some opposition parties instigated political violence in some instances, Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda always urged her supporters to remain calm and refrain from violence. As a matter of ensuring that the Tripartite Elections were credible, she consulted all major political
stakeholders in constituting the Malawi Electoral Commission. Indeed, the Electoral Commission is inclusive of all major political parties that were represented in Parliament.
During her two-year tenure of office, Dr Joyce Banda ensured that Malawi should be and it really is among the most media friendly countries in Africa where freedom of expression is not suppressed. Reputable international commentators have named Malawi as the most media friendly country in Africa.
Prior to the polling date, some opposition elements and some ill-willed commentators propagated in the media that Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda and her People’s Party (PP) were planning to rig the elections.
However, in a meeting with the Faith Community Leaders, Her Excellency emphasized that neither PP nor her government had any intention to rig the elections. However, those propagating this were in fact trying to drive people’s attention away from their own evil intentions to rig the elections by creating a false impression that the ruling party was planning to rig the elections.
Under Her Excellency’s leadership, the country experienced peaceful voting though with some instances where polling materials were not delivered on time or inadequate. In other cases, wrong materials were delivered. This led to some isolated cases of violence in some parts of Blantyre and Lilongwe, for example, which in turn led to voting being extended to next two days.
Notwithstanding that voting was continuing for the next two days in some polling centres, the media accredited by Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) continued to announce the unofficial results while voting was still progressing in the said affected areas. Although many stakeholders demanded that official broadcasters stop announcing the unofficial results while voting was still on-going, announcements continued nevertheless.
There have been reports that some monitors in some polling centres were chased by police and MEC officials, mainly teachers and police officers, even before sealing of ballot papers while in other cases a systematic pattern was emerging that polling staff were influencing voters to vote for certain candidates. These polling officers, mainly teachers and police officers, have now been exposed some of whom have confessed that they were induced with monetary rewards by a certain Presidential candidate.
With the foregoing in mind, it was not surprising when revelations of serious
irregularities started emerging; these irregularities had mostly four (4)
patterns.
1)Tallies from some constituencies were deliberately altered where figures were inflated to favour certain candidates as in Machinga North East where 38,778 registered voters were recorded while the tally was purposely inflated to purport that 184,223 had voted, figures inflated in favour of a particular candidate; (evidence
available);
2)Tallies from polling centres where figures were deliberately erased, tippexed, configured and accordingly adjusted to favour certain candidates, (evidence available);
3)Purported locally printed ballot papers without security features were pre-marked for a certain candidate and staffed in washing baskets, plastic pails and cartons and were ferried to polling centres while monitors were financially induced by polling officers to leave the polling centres while counting progressed. Most of these tallies were not signed and counter-signed by the monitors as required, (evidence available);
4)Some Presiding Officers from one polling centre signed for three different polling centres and in all cases, the figures for a certain candidate were almost the same.
As these challenges were becoming apparent, it was learnt that the Information Management System designed to manage elections results was hacked into and crushed.
The election stakeholders started raising alarm and the following were raised;
a) That announcing of the unofficial results be discontinued,
b) That the Electoral Commission embarks on manual counting and verification to address the irregularities as presented by electoral stakeholders.
To add to these voices, Her Excellency the President called upon Malawi Electoral Commission to recount the votes and address the irregularities that had been registered by the stakeholders.
The Malawi Electoral Commission Chairman rudely responded to these calls as “Cries of losers” and disregarded all the complaints as raised by political parties and other electoral stakeholders. Soon thereafter, wide revelations of rampant and serious irregularities in the electoral process started flooding the public domain.
It then became public knowledge that indeed the electoral process had been defrauded. Despite this public outcry and threats of violence from some political parties, the Malawi Electoral Commission Chairperson was intransigent, insensitive and non-responsive to the unfolding events.
At this time, it became apparent that the Malawi Electoral Commission had lost control of their own process; were not able to provide leadership in announcement of results and had lost control of election data notwithstanding that accredited media were still announcing the unofficial results and that tension was brewing in the country.
At this point, Electoral Stakeholders including some Presidential candidates
approached the President, Her Excellency Dr Joyce Banda to rise above politics and provide direction for the country. Hence, Her Excellency the President issued a Presidential Proclamation on Saturday 24th May 2014, four days after voting to nullify the electoral process due to serious irregularities that had emerged and the State President determined that fresh elections be held in 90 days. Her Excellency The State President used the powers vested in her, under Section 88 (2) to provide Executive
Direction in the interest of national unity and security.
The immediate reaction to this proclamation by certain sectors of the society who felt were going to benefit from the serious electoral irregularities was negative.
However, four hours after the proclamation, the Malawi Electoral Commission came public to address the nation admitting that the electoral process could indeed not be relied upon, and the electoral data could was not trustworthy and therefore could not provide a credible platform for announcement of results.
Secondly, the Commission requested the nation to give them an allowance of 30 days to physically verify the ballot papers and conduct the recount of the votes to remedy the many irregularities the Commission had come across.
This admission by the Commission vindicated the Presidential Proclamation that had just been issued and further comforted the public as it was now evident that the Commission had started listening and acting in the national interest.
In a similar show of support, one of the broadcasting houses that was accredited to announce the election results, Zodiak Broadcasting Station (ZBS), five hours after the proclamation, went public retracting that the electoral results they were announcing were unverified, could not be relied upon hence should be disregarded.
It became evident that the Presidential Proclamation had calmed the citizens and it brought hope of a peaceful and credible resolution to the irregularities of the electoral process.
Despite the public excitement that this development brought to the nation, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and their network obtained three injunctions restraining Malawi Electoral Commission from proceeding with the recounting and verification exercise. Malawi Electoral Commission and Malawi Law Society also obtained injunctions against the President’s Proclamation.
These many injunctions brought confusion to the direction of the whole electoral process and demonstrated that the credibility of the electoral process had been destroyed leaving the expectations of Malawians heavily eroded.
After extensive public debate and Stakeholders’ consultations, Malawi Electoral Commission announced to the nation on 26th May 2014 that they are convinced that the data available could be relied upon and therefore will not announce the results of the elections until a full recount and verification had been done; they further announced that they will take 30 days to carry out this exercise. This announcement by the Commission brought comfort and relief to the Malawi populace that the call by Her
Excellency The President Dr Joyce Banda was now being heeded to.
Despite this new welcoming decision by Malawi Electoral Commission, Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is still bent on frustrating this development which has been thoroughly discussed and agreed upon by Election Stakeholders and welcomed by the whole nation. The question in the people’s minds is why is the DPP still refusing the welcome development accepted by all stakeholders?
If indeed the DPP has won legitimately, why not wait for the audit process to finish so that they form the next government on a clean sheet? Reference can made to several commentaries and expert opinion some of which are attached.
EXPERT LEGAL OPINION
Legal View of a Private Practice Lawyer, Shepher Mumba of Golden & Law
"I have been reading the Constitution and the Parliamentary & Presidential Elections Act since yesterday and I do not find any provision preventing Malawi Election Commission (MEC) from conducting a recount of the votes. Amongst others, the function of MEC is to "determine electoral petitions and complaints related to the conduct of any elections" see s.76(2) of the Constitution. Further, s113 of the PPE states that "any complaint submitted in writing alleging any irregularity at any stage, if not satisfactorily resolved at a lower level of authority, shall be examined and decided on by the Commission and where the irregularity is confirmed the Commission shall take necessary action to correct the irregularity and the effects thereof" Recounting of votes is therefore within the functions and mandate of the MEC as provided by law.
Legal expert opinion by Bright Theu, legal expert at African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights in The Gambia.
MEC has power to undertake vote recount
There is a notion which as I gather has been endorsed by the High Court to the effect that the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) has no power/mandate/competence to order and undertake a “recount of the votes”. Below I advance the view that this notion is wholly misinformed; based on a deliberate circumvention of clear legal provisions and trite principles of interpretation; based on faulty reasoning; and probably induced by personal interest in the outcome of the issue the nation is contending with.
I argue for the position that MEC has every mandate to “determine” the outcome of an election and to use all appropriate methods available at its disposal for that purpose. I am open to contrary views that are informed by sound reasoning and proper application of the relevant principles that bear on the issues, in the spirit of an organised dialogue and not aimless bubbling.
Theu: MEC has the mandate to undertake vote recount
Theu: MEC has the mandate to undertake vote recount
To begin with, MEC is established under section 75 of the Constitution, the supreme law of the land. The duties, powers and functions of MEC are stipulated mainly under the Constitution (Constn), the Electoral Commission Act (ECA), and the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act (PPEA). Among the duties, powers and functions of MEC, section 8(1)(m) of ECA empowers MEC to “TO TAKE MEASURES AND TO DO SUCH OTHER THINGS AS ARE NECESSARY FOR CONDUCTING FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS.”
Further, section 76(2)(c) of the Constitution sanctions that MEC shall, among other duties and functions, “DETERMINE ELECTORAL PETITIONS AND COMPLAINTS RELATED TO THE CONDUCT OF ANY ELECTIONS” (s.76(2)(c), Constn). The critical term “determine” which articulates the duty and the attendant power of MEC is not defined in the Constitution. In fact it need not be defined because it is a well-known term which simply means decide, rule, judge, issue a verdict on any issue submitted to a competent body for that purpose.
In other words, to determine is to examine or assess an issue or a complaint in terms of the evidence presented and the applicable law with a view to deriving the conclusion as to whether the complaint is valid or not. Where the complaint is found to be invalid, the natural result is that is it dismissed. Where on the other hand the complaint is determined to be valid, naturally and logically an effective remedial measure is taken or issued and this forms part of the determination.
Accordingly, to the extent that MEC has the duty and function of “determining” electoral petitions and complaints, it is perfectly competent to decide whether any complaint it has received is valid and if so it has the attendant power to take or issue an effective remedial measure. For purposes of an election (MEC’s business) an effective remedial measure is one that ensures that the result of an election is credible in the sense that all irregularities that would adulterate and impair the validity of the outcome of the election are removed or mitigated to a level that they are insignificant to the outcome.
The idea is to make sure as much as possible that the result of the election is nothing but the people’s choice. This is the only way of ensuring that the authority to govern Malawi is validly entrusted, and not fraudulently assumed by any individual or group of individuals – and this is the higher constitutional value that any process and any measure taken by MEC seeks or must seek to achieve.
Indeed the process of “determining” electoral petitions and complaints must uphold that higher value, without which we risk being governed by a group of individuals who purport to acquire the mandate to govern by fraud!
From the above, it should be beyond rational contention that MEC has the duty and function to “determine electoral petitions and complaints”(s.76(2)(c), Constn) which includes the attendant power to take effective remedial measures (s.8(1)(m), ECA) where a given complaint is determined to be valid and of such gravity as to affect the validity of the outcome.
Whether “recounting the votes” is among the range of effective remedial measures MEC can take is the second point I address, since it is this particular measure that some people deny MEC the competence to opt for, a denial the Court has erroneously endorsed!
Trite principle of justice would have it that where there is a wrong there must be some measure adopted to right the wrong.
In more exact terms, we say where there is a wrong there must be a remedy. It is a principle that commands judicial authority. No civilised mind would raise any serious contention against that principle. In the case of electoral complaints which have been determined to be valid and of sufficient gravity as to adulterate and impair the validity of the outcome of the election, the remedial measure must seek to remove that impairment, or mitigate it to an insignificant size.
An electoral outcome is impaired or adulterated if it results from a combination of circumstances which defeat the people’s true choice (se “A”) by instead fraudulently making choice “B” appear as the people’s choice. The remedial measure will be effective if it is capable of expunging all factors that contribute to the masking of any candidate (e.g. “B”) as the people’s choice.
The means or necessary measures of expunging or mitigating irregularities are neither expressly stipulated nor limited under the laws that govern MEC’s mandate. Indeed there is no provision which restricts the measures that MEC can adopt to remedy an irregularity.
Rather and interestingly, section 113 of the PPEA simply and broadly states that “any complaint submitted in writing alleging any irregularity at any stage, if not satisfactorily resolved at a lower level of authority, shall be examined and decided on by the Commission and WHERE THE IRREGULARITY IS CONFIRMED THE COMMISSION SHALL TAKE NECESSARY ACTION TO CORRECT THE IRREGULARITY AND THE EFFECTS THEREOF.” This is important to note because it entails that MEC has fairly wide latitude to determine and adopt the appropriate and effective measure where it finds a given complaint or petition to be valid and of significant proportion.
On this point, I gather that those who advance the view that MEC has no competence to order and undertake a recount draw that conclusion from section 114(4) of the PPEA. Section 114 deals with appeals against determinations of MEC on electoral petitions and complaints. The determination against which an appeal can be lodged to the High Court are those mandated under, among others, section 76(2)(c) of the Constitution and section 113 of the PPEA (quoted immediately above).
For purposes of reviewing the determinations of MEC, section 114(1) states that “an appeal shall lie to the High Court against a decision of [MEC] confirming or rejecting the existence of an irregularity At s.114(4), the PPEA MERELY provides that “the High Court shall have power to direct scrutiny and RECOUNTING of votes if it is satisfied, during proceedings on an election petition, that such scrutiny and recount are desirable.”
There are a few points to note on s.114(4) of the PPEA. Firstly, it does not exclusively arrogate to the High Court the power to direct a RECOUNT or scrutiny. Secondly, it should not take someone reading volumes on process philosophy to figure that the High Court’s power procedurally only comes into play on review of determinations of MEC.
MEC would have to make its own determinations first and it is these determinations that would be reviewed by the High Court upon which the High Court may then direct a RECOUNT, as one of the possible remedial measures which the Court may find desirable.
I repeat, there is nothing in s114(4) of PPEA that exclusively arrogates to the High Court the power to direct a recount, a thing the High Court can only do upon a review of the determination of MEC. Put differently, there is nothing in s114(4) of PPEA prohibiting MEC or limiting MEC’s wide latitude to TAKE NECESSARY ACTION TO CORRECT THE IRREGULARITY AND THE EFFECTS THEREOF (s.113, PPEA).
How the Court can find that MEC has no mandate to adopt as a necessary measure the recount of the votes or such other measures of scrutiny to correct the irregularities it confirms is unclear. For the Court to come to such a conclusion, it would have to deliberately ignore the above quoted provisions and deliberately stretch s114(4) of the PPEA to mean and only mean that it (the High Court) has the mandate to order a recount.
Even at the risk of an overkill, section 114(4) of PPEA does not restrict MEC’s power to take necessary action to correct irregularities and the effects thereof! Procedurally, what the Court can do under s114(4) of the PPEA only follows after what MEC will have done under s.113 of the PPEA among other provisions.
I wish to conclude by saying that in tackling the issues that beset us as a nation regarding the election, we must seek to uphold the profound principle that the authority to government Malawi must validly derive from the people of Malawi and genuinely vest in a group of individuals who are the peoples’ choice determined by real votes cast in favour such individuals and not by some fraudulent means that mask given candidates as the people’s choice. That is the higher constitutional value that we must seek to uphold.
With a mind that is clogged with immediate personal interests, it is not possible to perceive and conceive that higher constitutional value and seek to uphold it. So what informed the Court’s decision that MEC has no power to adopt a recount as a measure for correcting irregularities that it has confirmed to be valid and substantial? Let people of good conscience decide for themselves.
• Bright Theu is former Malawi Law Society (MLS) secretary general and a private practicing lawyer
OPINION BY AN UNKNOWN LAWYER QUOTED BY STATE HOUSE
Malawian incompetence has reached it's apotheosis in the organization of these elections. I expected there were going to be problems this being the first time we are having tripartite elections. But I anticipated the problems were gonna come from the large volumes of candidates and complaints etc. never from registration and actual polling. I would give this Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) 1 out of 10. The only thing they've done well, and I really think it's more a result of Joyce Banda's tolerance than MEC doing, is the better coverage of opposition parties in the public media since 1994 when access to these was free for all. Otherwise, there's been no election here. Where I went to observe polling there were no voting materials until 10, not even chairs. A young man seeing my ID accosted me when I arrived and asked me to tell him what he was to do. He was a poll worker but hadn't been trained. Around 11 o'clock attempts were made to commence voting. Only 3 of the 21 ballot boxes had seals. And these seals had no serial numbers. How does one ensure the integrity of the vote under those circumstances? Fortunately the voters protested. Further there was very little indelible ink which would mean that after some time either voting was going to be suspended or would be allowed to continue without evidence of voting. Lots of people who had voter registration cards were not on the voters roll and a parallel register was to be provided where their details would be recorded. Eventually after 4 hours of waiting I left for another centre. I found people rioting there and couldn't stay as I feared they might mistake me for a poll worker.
Malawi has, since 1993, on it's statute books the Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Act. Faute de mieux it is the operation manual for the electoral process. Life has been made easy. Follow it and MEC is home and dry. In my opinion, on polling day, none of its provisions was respected. Can you imagine voting is still happening in some centers till now? In some places voting closed at 11 and counting could only happen the following day. How can anyone trust the results declared in such an election when there were no seals on the ballot boxes and even where there were seals theses had no serial numbers? When I stopped communicating with MEC people last night, their IT system wasn't working. They hadn't received results yet. In short the owners of the electoral process itself are having to hear the results from radio like the rest of us. There have been reported cases of tampering with results sheets, poll officials campaigning for the DPP candidates etc. how can the whole system just die? On this day? This is a system that has worked pretty well since 1993. Can MEC determine the result on the basis of radio announcements? Of course not. Determination of the results is a meticulous legal process that involves counting the ballot papers according to law, tallying of the results, reconciliation of the ballot papers, resolution of complaints to the satisfaction of complainants etc.
So where to Malawi? Personally, my opinion is that these elections have been mired in so much intrigue that no right thinking member of this or any society can vouch for their integrity. They should therefore be declared null and void and MEC should start afresh. MEC should either resign or be dismissed and a new one appointed to manage the new process; if that's asking for too much then as a compromise, MEC should abandon its IT system and do a manual count of the results and especially recounting the ballot papers and allowing political parties to take part. Making sure that what's in the ballot box is what the declared result is.
The first option poses a constitutional crisis. The president's and parliament's mandate is over. How do we extend her rule? How will we amend section 67 of the constitution to allow a new election date to be appointed? How will the president dismiss the MEC and appoint a new one without parliament? Can we call the old parliament? I don't think so but I'm sure we may be able to find some provision under the General a Interpretation Act.
ISSUED BY
STATE HOUSE PRESS OFFICE
KAMUZU PALACE, LILONGWE
27TH MAY 2014
Call for Professionalism in Coverage of The Elections
For immediate release
Wednesday, May 28, 2014
The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Malawi Chapter, the Media Council of Malawi (MCM) and the Malawi Editors Forum (MAEF) having met in Blantyre on 28th May 2014 and deliberated on the way the media has covered the electoral process so far, and having considered the current impasse, would like to appeal to all journalists and media outlets in the country to uphold professionalism and avoid being used as tools for promoting partisan interests.
The meeting observed that the media strived to respect the Media Code of Conduct which was developed and signed by all media bodies, media houses and other electoral stakeholders during the campaign period.
Nonetheless, we would like to remind all journalists and media houses to avoid the following:
Taking partisan positions;
Sensational reporting;
Mixing facts with opinion;
Cheque book journalism;
We do not condone professional misconduct and parroting of lies and half-baked stories and believe that we have a critical role to play to accurately inform Malawians without fear or favour.
It is important to note that in any democracy, free speech is paramount and affords the citizenry, including the media, a chance to debate and shape public opinion. But overzealous reporting on the part of the media will not help the nation.
We would therefore like to appeal to all journalists and media houses to remain vigilant and professional in their coverage of the elections.
We would also like to appeal to all Malawians to remain calm and peaceful and support the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) to undertake its task without any undue interference.
Signed
Anthony Kasunda, MISA Malawi Chairperson
Prof. Wiseman Chijere Chirwa, Media Council of Malawi
Cliff Kawanga, Malawi Editors Forum
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)