Judge Who Rejected Muluzi's Bribe

A MALAWI HIGH COURT JUDGE is making waves for unusual reasons. In a corruption-prone continent, Mr Justice Edward Twea has caught the nation's imagination after rejecting a cash "gift" from former President Bakili Muluzi.

Mr Muluzi is the man who made history when he dislodged President Kamuzu Banda to become post-independence Malawi's second president in 1994.

And the good judge, according to media reports, handled the rejection rather dramatically; he had the High Court and Supreme Court of Appeal deputy registrar return Sh7,000 (15,000 kwacha) to Mr Muluzi, who had given him the "gift" when the former was admitted to a hospital in Blantyre last year.

Mr Justice Twea had good cause to reject Mr Muluzi's cash gift; he happens to be one of the three constitutional court judges handling a case that seeks to interpret Section 83(3) of Malawi's constitution, which seeks to restrict the president, the vice-president and the second vice-president to a maximum two consecutive terms.

Mr Muluzi became president on a crest of popularity following decades of the Banda dictatorship. Then, Malawi Young Pioneers held sway.

The Pioneers literally forced beleaguered citizens to buy membership cards from the ruling Malawi Congress Party (MCP), which alone guaranteed their access to markets, grinding mills, hospitals, transport, you name it.

The Young Pioneers would simply leave a batch of cards at an office, only coming back for the money.

Pregnant women had to buy, not only their cards, but also for their yet-to-be born babies.

These Pioneers had a military wing reportedly trained by Israelis, which was better equipped than the national army.

IT WAS, THEREFORE, WITH A HUGE sigh of relief that Mr Muluzi took the reins of power a year after a successful referendum for multiparty politics in 1993.

But Mr Muluzi's good will among the people was short-lived - a fact that was amply demonstrated when he failed to convince Malawians to allow him to run for a third term.

Enough about historical background; the issue at hand is Mr Justice Twea's rejection of Mr Muluzi's K15,000. Not only that; the country's Anti-Corruption Bureau is currently investigating the former president on another case involving bribery of court clerks.

While the amount involved may be trivial, there is no escaping the judge's own explanation: " it would be inappropriate and unethical for him to accept the money that accompanied your good will message", wrote the registrar of the High Court.

Given that the money was linked to Mr Muluzi's visit to the judge, who had been admitted to hospital when the gift was made, it is easy to accuse the judge of being petty.

After all, isn't common for relatives, friends and well-wishers to offer gifts to those in hospital?

And yet, Mr Muluzi was not your normal well-wisher; he is a former Head of State seeking another term. It is, therefore, common sense that his financial gift should raise a red flag.

Secondly, Mr Justice Twea's rejection draws attention to the thin line between traditional hospitality and graft. When does a gift cease to be a gift and become a bribe that compromises a public officer in the execution of his duties?