CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW RECONVENES, PROPOSES REFORMS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 LILONGWE 000332 SIPDIS SIPDIS SENSITIVE STATE FOR AF/S STATE FOR INR/AA RITA BYRNES E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KDEM PGOV MI SUBJECT: CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW RECONVENES, PROPOSES REFORMS REF: 06 LILONGWE 286 LILONGWE 00000332 001.2 OF 002 ¶1. (SBU) Summary: From April 17-19 the Malawi Law Commission hosted the second constitutional review conference, ahead of their official presentation of proposed constitutional amendments to President Mutharika's Cabinet. The Commission presented their opinions on a number of controversial constitutional questions, putting forth proposed amendments in an effort to solve problems that have arisen over the country's first 13 years of democracy. The conference, which followed up on the February 2006 conference (reftel),brought together politicians, civil society leaders, traditional chiefs, and religious leaders to discuss the Commission's findings and proposals. The most high profile issues discussed were the re-institution of the recall provision for Members of Parliament, the clarification of presidential term limits, the re-introduction of the Senate, and the strengthening of the "floor-crossing" section of the constitution. However, despite the strong support many proposals received from the delegates, few reforms are likely to be passed through the highly politicized Malawian Parliament. End Summary. Proposed Changes -------------- ¶2. (U) One of the most high-octane discussions at the conference centered around the re-instatement of the recall provision for Members of Parliament, which would allow constituents to recall individual MPs by collecting the signatures of two-thirds of all registered voters in a constituency. This provision had originally been in the 1994 Malawian Constitution, but was removed in 1995 as one of the first acts of Parliament for fear that the provision would "encourage witch hunting and was considered to be liable to abuse by constituents." Predictably, the MPs in attendance at the Constitutional Conference vehemently opposed reintroduction of the recall provision, citing the fears that it would be used indiscriminately to target political opponents, a refrain that has often been repeated by MPs to Embassy officials in private. Most other delegates were highly in favor of the provision, arguing that MPs should be able to be held accountable by their constituents. Both major opposition parties vehemently oppose this proposal, along with a number of government 
MPs, if not the government itself. ¶3. (U) Another highly politicized issue, which split the MPs present, was the proposal to clarify presidential term limits. The constitution currently stipulates that a President can serve a "maximum of two consecutive terms," a phrase which has led some to assume that a president could serve two consecutive terms, take one term off, then run again for a third term. This is in fact exactly what former President Bakili Muluzi, president from 1994-2004, is currently attempting to do as he targets the 2009 election for a return to power. The Commission's proposal, however, is to strike out the word "consecutive", making it clear that a president can only serve two terms total. Muluzi's opposition United Democratic Front (UDF) party strongly opposes this proposal, while Mutharika's Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) favors it. The second opposition party, the Malawi Congress Party, is yet to take a public stance on the issue, but could oppose it for political reasons (Muluzi's candidacy might give MCP president John Tembo his best chance of winning the election by splitting the South between Muluzi and Mutharika). ¶4. (U) A slightly less controversial proposal, but more legislatively problematic and financially burdensome, would reintroduce a second chamber of the legislature, the Senate. The Senate would be composed of traditional chiefs, regional representatives, civil society and religious leaders, and various upstanding citizens. While the regional representatives chosen by district assemblies and chiefs elected by other chiefs, the other senators would be directly appointed by the President. The Senate would have the authority to approve, amend or reject bills after passage by the House, aside from appropriation or money bills. While the government might favor this proposal, it is likely that both opposition parties will oppose it due to the political loading in favor of the appointing President implicit in its makeup. ¶5. (U) The Commission also proposed a minor change to the constitutional provision barring MPs from changing parties (or "crossing the floor") after election, with the suggestion LILONGWE 00000332 002.2 OF 002 to strengthen the provision and make it apply to MPs elected as independents without explicit party affiliation. Of particular note with this issue, however, was that the commission did not recommend scrapping the provision altogether, as President Mutharika suggested they do when he opened the first convention in March of 2006. The commission's proposal for the law to apply to independent MPs is unlikely to make it out of Cabinet, as it is one of the few major proposed reforms that the government is likely to oppose. Next Hurdles -------------- ¶6. (U) The commission will now take into account comments on proposed constitutional changes brought up at the conference, then make their formal recommendations to President Mutharika's Cabinet. Cabinet will then review the proposals and decide which, if any, it will present to parliament as bills for constitutional amendments. These amendments would require a two-thirds majority in parliament to become law. Despite this defined process, there has been some discussion of putting together all the proposed amendments and holding a popular referendum to pass them en masse. The Malawi constitution does provide for a referendum to change certain provisions, but it is unclear whether bundling amendments in this way would be legal. A Futile Exercise? -------------- ¶7. (SBU) Comment: Unless somehow a referendum were held, it is unlikely that significant constitutional changes will result from this process. The process was conducted openly and involved all sectors of society, and many proposed reforms have fairly widespread support among the masses. Real reform, however, seems destined to fall by the wayside as the opposition and government struggle over short-term politics. The political parties believe that almost every proposal made in the Commission's 114-page report has some political effect or bias. This will make it extremely difficult to pass many of the proposed reforms through a Malawian parliament that is more divided now than it ever has been. Based on public and private comments of politicians, none seem willing to engage in any process of compromise that might put national interests ahead of short-term political gains. Unfortunately, the end result will be to leave a number of outstanding constitutional issues up to judicial interpretation, which is a recipe for more of the kind of political instability Malawi has suffered continually since 1994. End Comment. EASTHAM