PARLIAMENT ADOPTS IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURES

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 LILONGWE 000914 SIPDIS STATE FOR AF/S MELINDA TABLER-STONE STATE FOR INR/AA PARIS FOR D'ELIA E.O. 12958: DECL: 10/18/2010 TAGS: KDEM PREL PGOV MI SUBJECT: PARLIAMENT ADOPTS IMPEACHMENT PROCEDURES REF: A. LILONGWE 634 ¶B. LILONGWE 614 Classified By: PolOff Tyler Sparks for reasons 1.4 b and d. ¶1. (SBU) Summary: On October 18, Malawi,s Parliament adopted procedures which provide the framework for the possible impeachment of President Mutharika. The opposition's next step will be to propose a constitutional amendment to establish a National Governing Council, which would make a major change in the succession scenario should the impeachment attempt be successful. That would require a 2/3 majority in parliament and the first true test of the opposition's strength on the impeachment issue. The impeachment attempt seems likely to continue to distract Parliament, even as Malawi moves towards the worst hunger crisis in the last ten years. Heads of mission discussed a possible strategy for a quiet effort to encourage the Malawian parties to reconcile (see para 6). End summary. ¶2. (C) The adopted impeachment procedures put in place the framework for impeaching any sitting President or Vice-President, and only required a simple majority to pass. From here, however, the task becomes more difficult for the two opposition parties, the Malawi Congress Party (MCP) and United Democratic Front (UDF). While the UDF is the main driver of the impeachment attempt, the MCP is insisting that a National Governing Council follow any impeachment. In their minds, this would pave the way for MCP president and leader of the opposition John Tembo to take over as President, instead of the Vice-President Cassim Chilumpha, a member of the UDF. (Note: According to the current constitutional provisions for impeachment, the vice-president would serve out the remainder of the term, in this case until ¶2009. End note.) ¶3. (C) However, a constitutional amendment establishing a National Governing Council (NGC) will require a 2/3 majority, which will not be easy. The MCP has 59 seats and the UDF roughly 45 seats in the 187 member parliament, which still puts them over 20 votes short of 2/3. The NGC vote will be the first real test of the MCP and UDF's combined strength. An MCP parliamentarian told PolOff that he doesn't think they will have enough votes to pass the NGC or an impeachment motion. ¶4. (SBU) The impeachment motion has been intensely debated in the press in recent weeks, and civil society organizations have begun to speak out strongly on the issue. All sides seem to agree that impeachment procedures should be put in place as called for by the constitution. However, the Malawi Law Commission and some civil society organizations have come out against the procedures adopted by Parliament. They favor the establishment of an independent tribunal to judge the merit of charges put forward by Parliament, rather than Parliament acting as both prosecutor (in bringing an indictment by a two-thirds vote) and the ultimate "judge" of an impeachment trial. The opposition has so far ignored outside advice and has pressed ahead to put in place procedures that would allow the impeachment of Mutharika before the end of the year. ¶5. (C) Comment: There are a good many things wrong with this picture. First, the political class here has lost sight of whatever misdeeds Mutharika might have committed, if any, to deserve impeachment. Thus this discussion is to this point entirely theoretical and political. Second, the National Governing Council proposal makes a major change in the constitutional schema, which at present is an orderly succession to a single elected official. Should the NGC proposal be adopted, it would guarantee a succession to an interim governing body, negotiated behind closed doors without public debate and composed of a coalition of opposition figures who are unlikely to be able to govern effectively, a thoroughly bad idea. Third, it would open the door to an unbudgeted and expensive election within the current fiscal year and within the current food crisis, something that neither we nor the IMF should be excited about. Finally, we are about to see Malawi politics get as nasty as we have seen it in the eleven years and some months since the departure of the Banda dictatorship. ¶6. (C) Donor heads of mission discussed a possible joint intervention in their regular monthly meeting October 19. It was agreed that the UK mission would draft a set of points with an eye to issuing a statement of concern about the impact of this fight on Malawi, and the investment the donors have made in the country in recent years. Prior to issuing such a statement, however, the donors would deploy it in draft to key leaders (the government, Tembo, Muluzi, others) to attempt to get the effect without necessarily intervening publicly in the debate. The group agreed that it would be far preferable to encourage a Malawian reconciliation effort to emerge, noting that the Public Affairs Committee (PAC) which has played this role in the past, has taken itself out of the running for mediator in this current crisis. The South African High Commissioner agreed to raise the question in the AU group here whether the AU might consider a political mission or statement of concern, and the European and US heads of mission urged her to re-visit whether South Africa might find itself able to urge restraint, reflection, and reconciliation on the Malawian poltical actors. ¶7. (C) The saving grace is that while it might be close, it will be difficult for the opposition parties to get the 2/3 majority they need for either the NGC or impeachment. It would take surprise defections from the dwindling government camp to enable a two-thirds majority. And a combined effort on their part was not enough to get a 2/3 majority on a separate issue this past July (reftel B). However, while Parliament focuses on the push for impeachment they effectively ignore other pressing business, such as the looming food crisis (in any sense other than slamming the government for nonfeasance) or a long-delayed anti-money laundering bill. For its part, government seems to have little strategy other than to stall the impeachment process as long as possible. Their hope is that the momentum behind impeachment will fade with time, and they are very mindful that Parliament,s current session only has another week and a half to run. Unfortunately, they were unable to stall the procedures voted yesterday, and even stalling takes the government,s full time and effort, to the detriment of other pressing business. EASTHAM