Finding sense from Malawi’s Parliamentary madness

Events surrounding “section 65” have been coming in such dizzying torrents that attempts to make sense out of the arguments seem like rocket science. It is in the midst of this riotous and electrifying gale that I find myself. And I have to navigate through this maze, make sense of these twisted and tangled tongues of “politicians” from both sides of the so called “honourable” house, so I can write reasonably coherently, while trying to balance rationalism and emotism or confuse one for the other. Here I am attempting to walk this tight rope, to navigate this delicate terrain with studied steps, because it is very easy for one to be swept by the overwhelming and direct effect of these events. Regrettably, it would seem that some of our political leaders are at serious pains with this balancing act, so much so that they may have allowed their emotions and egos to run away with them.

Yes, we are in the dispensation of liberty and freedom - freedom of expression and all that. Yes, we are deeply incensed by the perfidy that is “Section 65” and the overall attitude of our politicians towards the Supreme Courts interpretation of it. But that is not sufficient to write off our constitution and or give it up to the dogs. Agreed that some things may be wrong in the constitution, but that does not in any way suggest its uselessness. Even for the fact that it has been amended several times in its 13 year history, it is still better than other constitutions, should be enough to show that the Malawi Constitution has some redeeming qualities still. At such a period in a nation’s history, the enlightened, the knowledgeable are called to duty; they have a responsibility to show direction and give hope to their less empowered brothers and sisters. I want to believe that the enlightened are the conscience of the people, the vicarious agents of the people’s unspoken yearnings and resolves.

Yes, the politicians and the executive may have been blatant in their ways and means, and that the rest of us are less so is not enough to acquit us of our own guilt. If anything, our role has been most insidious. It is “we” who give essential strategic support and sometimes prods. So, as critics of the system and analysts of events and happenings, we should know where to draw the line; when patriotism is in dire straits and the nation requiring of our enlightenment and our knowledge. Malawi ’s failings, if we begin to locate them, cannot be said to be that of the politicians alone. The “citizenry” cannot extricate itself from these failings. Any honest examination of the anatomy of Malawi ’s problems, then and now, should start from the self. We all should ask ourselves this simple question: in what ways have I contributed to where Malawi is today? One of the easiest things to do is to put the blame on the next person, which is unfortunate really.

It is my belief that we as a nation often take “pride” in pointing out Malawi ’s faults and expect others to deal with them. I wish for once we could take pride in being Malawian and stop the “fad of downgrading and bashing anything Malawian”. Malawi is our country and Malawi ’s faults are ours to fix not to curse. It is in light of that conviction that I have noted that there has been too much emphasis in Malawi on protecting individual political rights and neglecting the people’s economic rights. This more so demonstrated in the current “deadlock” in parliament, where the political rights of about 70 individuals to be or not to be in parliament seem to be prioritised above the economic rights of over 12 million Malawians.

The Malawi Constitution is an economic document as well as a political document. The framers of the constitution believed that economic freedom as well as political freedom is essential for national prosperity and growth. Accordingly, they included numerous provisions in the Constitution that support and encourage the operation of a market economy. Thus, as the basic "law of the land," the Malawi Constitution defines the essential features of our economy.

Chapter IV of the constitution of Malawi has some fundamental human rights that are of economic orientation. These include the following:

Every person shall be able to acquire property alone or in association with others

No person shall be arbitrarily deprived of property

Every person shall have the right freely to engage in economic activity, to work and to pursue a livelihood anywhere in Malawi

All persons and peoples have a right to development and therefore to the enjoyment of economic, social, cultural and political development and women, children and the disabled in particular shall be given special consideration in the application of this right.

The State shall take all necessary measures for the realization of the right to development. Such measures shall include, amongst other things, equality of opportunity for all in their access to basic resources, education, health services, food, shelter, employment and infrastructure.

The State shall take measures to introduce reforms aimed at eradicating social injustices and inequalities.

The State has a responsibility to respect the right to development and to justify its policies in accordance with this responsibility.

Every person shall have the right to fair and safe labour practices and to fair remuneration.

All persons shall have the right to form and join trade unions or not to form or join trade unions.

Every person shall be entitled to fair wages and equal remuneration for work of equal value without distinction or discrimination of any kind, in particular on basis of gender, disability or race.

The State shall take measures to ensure the right to withdraw labour.

However, it seems to me that there has not been enough economic analysis of our constitution to the extent that people sometimes forget that the constitution gives them economic rights that are no less important than their political rights. An economic analysis of our constitution could go a long way to expand the scope of public constitutional debates by offering more perspectives on how changes in rules of the “political” game may affect rational political behaviour and the resulting performance democratic governments for both the social and economic welfare of its citizens.

Let us take the current situation in Malawi and make a simple economic implication of the speaker declaring the 70 or so seats vacant and then as the leader of the opposition wishes the rest of the members of parliament debate and decide the budgetary allocation for the next fiscal year. We know that in Malawi, the problem with public goods is that of excess demand and in the context of Malawi where different MPs represent different constituents. If a new road would yield benefits of say 1 million Malawi Kwacha to everyone in Chirazulo and could be built by a tax that cost everyone in Malawi 1 Malawi kwacha, then the people in Chirazulo would like their MP in parliament to advocate for this road during this budget debate.

When the parliament is then controlled by a coalition which represents a coalition of only remaining MPs, these MPs may rationally vote for public goods that benefit their constituents without taking account of the tax burden these local public goods will impose on the constituents who will have no representation in parliament during this debate.

Once we understand that the remaining MPs in parliament will tend to ignore interest of those constituents whose MPs are not in parliament, we can find a strong argument to justify that the constitution enshrined economic rights of those constituents have been violated. The question I can not answer as an economist is whether this makes legal sense and whether it could stand in a court of law.