MALAWI: PRESSURE GROWING ON PRESIDENT MUTHARIKA TO CONVENE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 LILONGWE 000167 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR AF/S - E. PELLETREAU MCC FOR DIEDRA FAIR E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV KDEM MI SUBJECT: MALAWI: PRESSURE GROWING ON PRESIDENT MUTHARIKA TO CONVENE PARLIAMENT LILONGWE 00000167 001.2 OF 002 ¶1. Summary: Public pressure is growing against President Mutharika's stand not to convene Parliament prior to the necessary budget session in May-June as long as the opposition insists on implementation of anti-floor-crossing provisions of the constitution. Malawi's leading civil society organization, the Public Affairs Committee (PAC) and the equivalent to the Bar Association, the Malawi Law Society (MLS),led the way by releasing press statements condemning the President's stand, inciting many other NGOs and civil society groups to quickly join the chorus demanding a new legislative session. Despite the growing pressure, Mutharika is not likely to give in soon and may become more steadfast in his refusal to avoid any appearance of weakness. At the same time, opposition parties will likely be emboldened by the public support, potentially lengthening the current impasse. End Summary. PAC Leads the Charge -------------- ¶2. On February 15, PAC, the leading civil society organization in Malawi, released a press statement stating its opposition to President Mutharika's refusal to call a new session of Parliament. The statement was in response to Mutharika's February 2 comments that as long as the opposition insisted on implementation of section 65 of the constitution, which mandates the Speaker to declare seats of members of parliament who cross the floor vacant, he would not convene the National Assembly. Mutharika's Democratic Progressive Party would be most affected by section 65, with approximately 40 seats at stake. PAC's statement was uncharacteristic in its blunt language. PAC argued two points; the Parliament must be convened because it is constitutionally required; and the government's fear of the implementation of section 65 is not enough to justify disregarding the constitution. PAC went further to state that the group fears that without a functioning Parliament, Malawi will plunge into dictatorship. PAC, which is made up of religious leaders, was instrumental in the ending of the one-party state and has a long history of confronting the heads of state (not just the present one) on rule of law issues. Malawi Law Society Follows -------------- ¶3. The Malawi Law Society (MLS),the Malawi equivalent of the Bar Society, followed up the PAC press release with a February 25 letter addressed to the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC) and the office the Speaker of the National Assembly. (The President is constitutionally required to consult with the speaker to initiate a meeting of the National Assembly.) The letter, which was widely distributed, emphasized that running government without regular meetings of the legislature is both undemocratic and unconstitutional. The MLS insisted that all three branches of government must be fully functional and echoed PAC's call for the President to convene Parliament. The MLS commented that the lack of constitutionally-mandated local government elections for the past 3 years as giving greater weight to the need for parliamentary representation of the public. The MLS also asked the opposition to consider the importance of pending legislation when weighing its insistence on implementation of section 65. Others Join the Call -------------- ¶4. In a face to face meeting with the leadership of the Council for Non Governmental Organizations in Malawi (CONGOMA),the umbrella organization of Malawi's NGOs, CONGOMA told the President that Parliament had to meet in order to discuss 14 bills which are outstanding since his prorogation of Parliament in September 2007. CONGOMA agreed that the President's fear of implementation of Section 65 was not ample reason for not convening Parliament. CONGOMA also stated that the courts have already validated the section as legal and nothing should block its implementation. ¶5. The Chairperson of the Malawi Human Rights Commission (MHRC),a constitutionally-created, independent government agency and the head of Human Rights Consultative Committee (HRCC),the umbrella group of all Malawi human rights NGOs echoed the call for the President to convene Parliament regardless of section 65. Both cited Malawi citizens' basic rights to representation in government through the legislature. The World Bank's Country Manager for Malawi added financial incentives for action, confirming that the lack of a parliament session could contribute to delays in the implementation of power interconnection project between Malawi and Mozambique. President's Own Party Even Suggests Convening Parliament -------------- -------------- ¶6. According to media reports even parliamentarians from Mutharika's own Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and members of LILONGWE 00000167 002.2 OF 002 cabinet back the call for Parliament to meet soon. They argue that the implementation of floor crossing legislation can not be put off forever (or at least, up to the May 19, 2009 national election). Additionally, most believe that even if section 65 is implemented and seats are declared vacant, the Malawi Election Committee's inability to hold timely by-elections could serve as the basis of court injunctions allowing MPs to stay in the National Assembly until May 2009 elections. There are also growing fears among government MPs that the President's stand might to not be supported by a majority of the people, strengthening opposition support as elections draw nearer. In a move to try to control the damage of the President's statement, a DPP spokesman recently reacted to civil society's complaints by absurdly claiming that Mutharika never refused to convene Parliament despite the fact that Mutharika's February comments were broadcast on national radio. ¶7. Comment: Malawi's civil society, which up until the President's February 2 comments were supportive of Mutharika, are clearly alarmed at the President's tough and arguably unconstitutional stand. While media reports claim many in the DPP want the President to call a new session of Parliament, DPP sources have told emboffs that party leaders have actually counseled Mutharika to wait until pressure relents to avoid the appearance of succumbing to the opposition. Unfortunately for Mutharika, civil society continues to call for Parliament and pressure is likely to increase instead. Moreover, the opposition parties will likely be emboldened by the public support, potentially lengthening the current impasse. End Comment. EASTHAM