UNCLAS LILONGWE 000163

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

STATE FOR AF/S GABRIELLE MALLORY
STATE FOR INR/AA

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PGOV KDEM KCOR MI
SUBJECT: GOVERNMENT DEFIES COURT ORDER TO REINSTATE VP

REF: A. LILONGWE 133


B. LILONGWE 137


1. (SBU) Summary: Government continues to ignore a court
injunction against the dismissal of Vice President Cassim
Chilumpha, and has withdrawn his security detail, staff and
vehicles. For his part, Chilumpha announced on February 15
he plans to sue the Attorney General for contempt of court.
The refusal of President Mutharika's government to follow
the court order has deepened the current constitutional
crisis (reftel A), and sets a dangerous precedent for
Presidential power. End Summary.


2. (SBU) According to one source, during a recent cabinet
meeting the President announced that unspecified health
problems would soon keep him out of the country for a limited
time. Mutharika told the cabinet that he didn't want
Chilumpha, with whom he had publicly feuded, to take over
while he was away. After the cabinet meeting Mutharika and
his 'inner circle', which includes the Attorney General,
decided to put forward the claim that Chilumpha had
effectively resigned (reftel A). President Mutharika then
announced on February 9 Chilumpha's "constructive"
resignation, and declared that he was accepting the
resignation.


3. (SBU) This clearly unconstitutional move was immediately
challenged by the VP, who obtained a court injunction against
his dismissal on February 10. However the Attorney General,
disingenuously claiming that the injunction never specified
the VP should remain in his office, removed the trappings of
the vice presidency--including security detail and civil
servant staff--from Chilumpha.


4. (SBU) The High Court quickly followed up with a
'clarification' on February 12 that Chilumpha should maintain
his office, and specifically that government could not remove
his security, staff, vehicles or pay. However, the Attorney
General has refused to reinstate Chilumpha's entitlements,
and repeatedly claimed that he has never been officially
served with the 'clarification'.


5. (SBU) For their part, civil society organizations have
largely come out against the VP's dismissal. The influential
Public Affairs Committee and the Muslim Association of Malawi
(MAM) have both condemned Chilumpha's removal as
unconstitutional. Chilumpha is a Muslim and loyalist of the
United Democratic Front, the Muslim-dominated party of former
President Bakili Muluzi. MAM's Secretary General has gone as
far as to call it as an "attempt to marginalise Muslims," in
local media. A MAM march in part to support the VP is
scheduled for February 17 in Lilongwe.


6. (SBU) Comment: The President's decision to unilaterally
dispose of the VP will be examined by a constitutional
review, which is scheduled to take place within the next two
weeks. However, perhaps the most troubling part of the
entire ordeal has been the Attorney General's failure to
comply with the High Court injunction. While Malawi's court
system is often slow to act, it is generally respected both
by the public and by politicians. This is precisely what
makes the Government's defiance of the High Court ruling in
this case such a dangerous precedent. The President seems
intent on doing away with Chilumpha; however it still looks
very unlikely that the courts would side with Mutharika on
his interpretation of the VP's "resignation". It remains to
be seen what the President will do if the courts rule that
his dismissal of Chilumpha is unconstitutional.
CLOUD