by Daniel Wang
July 26, 2019. Blantyre is enveloped in a familiar scene so ubiquitous as to be hidden from the front pages of almost every mainstream American newspaper. Dozens of bodies glisten under the unforgiving July sun, demanding the resignation of Jane Ansah, chairperson of the Malawi Electoral Commision. Two men prominently display a vinyl banner, occupied by the bold-faced words “Restoring our destiny through electoral justice.” The protesters, headed for the state residences of the major cities and armed with a petition for Ms. Ansah’s immediate departure from office, are confronted by a blockade of heavily fortified vehicles. Several men cloaked in tactical gear, hands gripping the barrels of their FN FAL assault rifles, stand guard along the flanks of the checkpoint. Tensions are high. The charred corpse of a government office complex in Lilongwe is still fresh in everyone’s minds. President Mutharika won the election last month narrowly. The election was a fraud; Mutharika’s co-conspirators had used Tipp-Ex correction fluid to physically alter the tallies of dozens of polling stations. Several protesters nearly stoned a police officer to death. The military has been called to “maintain peace.” The inevitable result of this pervasive cycle of political turmoil looms large. Democracy is a fragile thing, isn’t it?
Like any gripping narrative, the turbulent aftermath of last year’s Presidential Election in Malawi has, despite numerous uncertainties, been largely resolved. In February, the Constitutional Court of Malawi, the highest judicial institution in the nation, ruled that the widespread tampering of election results warranted an unprecedented re-run of the election. This summer, over 4.4 million Malawians casted their ballots; the opposition leader Lazarus Chakwera defeated sitting President Mutharika substantially, receiving roughly 58.27% of the vote. This miraculous democratic triumph, however, was not a result of some political deus ex machina. Rather, the 2020 Presidential re-run illustrates the remarkable resilience of Malawi’s government. Specifically, the results from this year’s election demonstrate the significance of the nation’s system of separation of powers; an independent military and judiciary both ensured the sanctity of the democratic process.
First, the autonomy of the Malawian military helped vanguard the nation’s democracy during the political chaos that ensued after Mutharika’s re-election in 2019. Though the Malawi Defense Force (MDF)’s involvement in the dispersion of protesters during last summer’s political demonstrations could be interpreted as a result of executive pressure, the MDF did not respond to dissenters with violence. Rather, the military expertly maintained peace between demonstrators and the police. During a series of protests this March, the MDF actually shielded protesters from harassment by local law enforcement officers. Incumbent President Lazarus Chakwera lauded the military’s role in maintaining civility during last spring’s demonstrations, “The MDF is one institution the people of Malawi have always been able to count on to uphold the constitution in times of political crisis.” retired brigadier and security expert Marcel Chriwa similarly viewed the MDF as a peacekeeping force. He commented, “[The army] intervenes only to remove the obstacles to proper functions of the civilian political system, including police. The MDF returned to the barracks after it was satisfied that the adversary or the threat had been well taken care of and could not harm national security.” The military’s ability to act as an impartial agent of stability lies in its independent relationship with the country’s executive, legislative, and judicial branches. The MDF does not act under the supervision of any particular governmental body but rather works in conjunction with other political apparatuses. This allows the Malawian military to act autonomously, and hence resist the influence of political tendencies. Without the MDF acting as a responsible arbiter, political dissent would surely have devolved into factional violence. Thus, a stable, sovereign armed force contributed to the success of this year’s Presidential election re-run.
Second, the independent judiciary of Malawi directly influenced the successful override of last year’s compromised plebiscite. Fundamental to the Malawian judicial system is the concept of autonomy. According to Redson Kapindu, Judge of the High Court of Malawi and Visiting Associate Professor of Law at the University of Johannesburg, “The founding provisions for the judiciary are spelt out in section IX of the Constitution. Section 103(2) of the Constitution accords the judiciary jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature, and exclusive authority to decide whether an issue is within its competence.” In a 2012 report, the International Bar Association concluded that the principles of judicial sovereignty outlined in the Malawian constitution were not only institutionalized but actively upheld by sitting judges: “The IBAHRI found that the judiciary is largely independent and effective, despite challenges faced in the administration of justice.” This judicial autonomy shielded the nation’s Constitutional Court from potential political fallout after its nullification of the 2019 presidential vote. Empowered by its sovereignty, the judicature not only authorized a rerun of the election but also mandated that eligible candidates would have to receive a simple majority of the vote to become the next executive. Under this revised electoral system, former President Mutharika—who only garnered 38% of the popular vote in 2019—would not have been elected in the first place. If the judiciary was not an autonomous ruling body, however, Mutharika would have easily threatened the Constitutional Court’s justices into confirming his ‘victory’. Therefore, an autonomous judicature influenced this summer’s effective electoral re-run.
In conclusion, the presence of a sovereign military and judiciary in Malawi ensured the success of the 2020 presidential election re-run. The autonomous governmental institutions of the nation ensured that a system of democracy was preserved in a relatively peaceful, controlled, manner despite Mutharika’s blatant disregard for popular rule. Ultimately, Malawi’s resilient system of governance—rooted in the separation of powers—can be considered as a model for democracy and reform in a geopolitical region riddled with authoritarian regimes.