Towards a Truly Democratic and Peaceful Malawi after the Sixth All-Inclusive Public Affairs Committee Conference: What should be the stand of an Artist who loves their country in all this?

Introduction

The position of an artist in a nation that is striving to assert within it a truly democratic and peaceful space is as complex as complex itself. By artist here, I am confining myself to the trade in which I strive to perfect myself—writing. So this post seeks to answer the question what the role of a writer should be in a context where a nation is fighting to make itself a true democracy within the context of peace and constitutionalism. As I strive to achieve this object, I shall also proffer my view or assessment of the two-day Sixth All-Inclusive Conference the Public Affairs Committee (PAC) had organised in Blantyre on June 7 and June 8 this year. My position is to demonstrate to all sides that whatever we want to achieve, moderation should be our guiding principle. Perhaps I should also point this out: while advancing my position, I shall also look at the question whether the Public Affairs Committee is relevant in this day and age, and whether the culture of ultimatums can be justified in negotiations in our context. This Conference was organised with funding from the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA) and ran under the theme ‘The State of Governance and Public Trust: Reclaiming our Destiny’.

Delegates at the Conference

First, I should say something on the composition of the delegation at the Conference. This I say because I consider issues of representation crucial as far as the question of ownership, consensus and representation is concerned. In short, the level of representation can answer the question whether all voices were represented at that forum.

As far as I am concerned, all sides were well represented there, for the delegates at the Conference included human rights activists, revered Men of GOD (among which The Reverend Felix Chingota who is the Public Affairs Committee Chair, Archbishop of the Blantyre Archdiocese of the Catholic Church, Thomas Luke Msusa), academicians (including some of the finest law and history minds on the land), and of course, a government delegation, eleven of them which included Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs (Samuel Tembenu), Minister of Health (Peter Kumpalume), Minister of Transport and Public Works (Jappie Mhango), Director of Communication for State Residences (Bright Molande), Chief Presidential Advisor on Domestic Policy (Hetherwick Ntaba), Presidential Advisor on Religious Affairs (Timothy Khoviwa), and Presidential Advisor on Civil Society and Non-Governmental Organisations (Mavuto Bamusi). Also in attendance were the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s Secretary General (Greselder Jeffrey) and its National Legal Advisor (Charles Mhango).

My Word of Appreciation

Every time fellow Malawians conduct themselves in a manner peaceful and accommodating, I feel the greatness of being Malawian. So, first, congratulations to all the people who gathered at this Conference on conducting themselves in a manner so Malawian and reflective of our being conscious of the merit of nation building. These things do not happen elsewhere, and we should always thank GOD for giving us this gift of peace and trust within ourselves, that we can handle ourselves and surge forward together as a people, all for the good of this Land, this Home, Malawi.

Honestly, tensions had been high days to the Conference. In fact, during his opening speech, the PAC Chair, Reverend Chingota said Government had been parading on the public broadcaster, the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation or MBC, pro-ruling DPP civil society organisations and traditional chiefs to castigate and ridicule the quasi-religious organisation, I mean PAC. For your taste, this is what the Man of GOD said on the issue as attributes The Daily Times dated June 8, 2017: “Enough is enough; we will not fold our hands because of castigations or mudslinging from other quarters or within ourselves. . . We are aware in modern times that, children of darkness have become smarter than children of the light. However, truth and justice will prevail. PAC shall remain PAC.” Even the headline under which it ran said so much in words so few: ‘PAC not moved with Gvt tantrums’.

That tensions had run high could also be attested by the fact that the Conference had been allocated a heavy police presence. According to The Nation dated Thursday, June 8, 2017 (see ‘Heavy Police Presence at PAC Conference’), there had been a thick presence of police around Sunbird Mount Soche, the hosting premises of the Conference. The article says the place had been heavily guarded by both armed and unarmed police officers as far back as Tuesday, June 6. It (the article) goes on to say, even during the proceedings themselves (on Wednesday June 7) about 10 police officers, both plain clothed and uniformed, perched themselves among the delegates.

It had been the fear of many that the machete-wielding rowdy youths of the ruling DPP would descend on the gathering to disrupt the Conference. This time they had avoided that mistake. And, despite the verbal tussle between parties, the Conference ended well.

Second, I should congratulate the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Samuel Tembenu, on absorbing criticism the gentlemanly way. I am saying this in connection with the sentiments Archbishop Msusa, the head of the Roman Catholic Church in Malawi, made at the Conference as regards the manner in which the public broadcaster, the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation or MBC, conducts itself.

According to “Malawi’s head of Catholic Church blasts ‘disinformation’ MBC: Minister Tembenu says ‘Sorry’” available at www.nyasatimes.com, Archbishop Thomas Luke Msusa is said to have “lost his temper and blasted the tax-funded broadcaster, MBC, for twisting his words to suit its political propaganda in favour of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party—DPP”. The article says, Archbishop Msusa “seemed enraged at how MBC portrayed him as President Peter Mutharika’s and DPP’s sympathiser by sensationalising and quoting him out of context.”

The background to the news is that somewhere last year during a Public Affairs Committee-Peter Mutharika meeting, the Archbishop had said a statement in which was “We will support you”. And it seems what MBC did was to throw away the rest of the words and context, to turn that part into fodder for propaganda, a thing which did not go down well with the Archbishop who is said to have warned that if not controlled, the continued MBC propaganda could invite anarchy in the country.

Not typical of people in power, the Minister of Constitutional Affairs, Tembenu, apologised to Archbishop Msusa unreservedly. Tembenu’s handling of the Archbishop’s sentiments differed markedly with that by the MCP at the turn of the multiparty politics in the country in 1992.

When the Bishops-authored March-8-1992 Pastoral Letter (also called the Lenten Letter) was read nation-wide in all Roman Catholic Churches, the then ruling single party MCP had responded with fire, ganging up to kill the Bishops. It was a project dead on arrival, for their heavy-handed reaction ended up inflaming the multitude.

I think it was prudent of Tembenu to apologise unreservedly, especially considering the personage who was expressing the sentiments—a man of respect and integrity, a man anointed of GOD. I believe that every time a leadership begins to tussle with Servants of GOD, it digs for itself some shallow grave. In Uganda, after Idi Amin’s regime had brutally murdered Archbishop Janan Luwum, that Anglican Archbishop of Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and Boga-Zaire, Amin’s leadership clock began to tick faster and soon the writing appeared on the wall. I personally believe that Amin’s last straw in his fall wasn’t his attack on Tanzania, but his brutal murder of Archbishop Luwum. By laying his hand on the Anointed of the Most High GOD, Amin had carved for himself his end. That is the way to go Mr Minister.

At the same Conference, Student Union of Chancellor College President Sylvester Ayuba James had described the ruling DPP Presidential Advisor on Domestic Policy, Hetherwick Ntaba, as the biggest hypocrite and a devil. Ntaba, now DPP but once a close ally of Dr Hastings Kamuzu Banda of the Malawi single party era, is said to have defended Government on corruption, saying all sides in the country, including the church, were beneficiaries of corruption.

It was interesting the people spoke with the freedom due Malawians. I am sure it would be a different story if someone had tried to use outright force or intimidation to stifle that free debate. This is one of those rare moments one should hail the ruling DPP for respecting freedom of expression. You win more by playing the keen listener.

Whether Artists should comment on things political

Any sane artist in Africa would strive for peace at whatever cost. There are three reasons I think for this. First, the devastation and human damage that conflicts bring upon a nation require vigilance in artists to ensure peace prevails at all costs. Second, artists are often privileged as far as knowledge and analysis of issues are concerned. In a population where the majority are illiterate, and where those educated refuse to take time to acquire skills in news analysis, the artist must come in to play the teacher for those lacking the skills and knowledge. He or she should also play the voice for those oppressed against the oppressor or those privileged. The moment those who should contribute cease to do so, democracy begins to lose its meaning.

The last reason artists should never fold their arms as far as issue peace are concerned is that, anywhere, the atmosphere of instability robs artists of time to compose in peace. I know arguments that oppression does bring perfection in writing. I do not share that though I know that many a time artists begin to question things or comments on issues once they find themselves in hot soup.

When Ngugi wa Thiong’o was incarcerated by the Jomo Kenyatta Government in Kenya, only a week while there in prison, he met Wasonga Sijeyo. By this time, Sijeyo had already spent nine years in that (prison) block. Ngugi in ‘Toilet Paper’ (see Gathering Seaweed: African Prison Writing edited by Jack Mapanje, p 236) says Sijeyo had told him why intellectuals should suffer on behalf of the people so as to awaken to that call to speak for them. Sijeyo is said to have said:

It may sound a strange thing to you, but in a sense I am glad they brought you here. The other day, in fact a week or so before you came, we were saying that it would be a good thing for Kenya if more intellectuals were imprisoned. First, it would wake most of them from their illusions. And some of them might outlive jail to tell the world. (“Ngugi wa Thiong’o, Kenya: ‘Toilet Paper’”, in Gathering Seaweed: African Prison Writing, p 236).

Sijeyo is right; intellectuals ought to wake up from their slumber, but certainly not through incarceration. No one goes to prison and comes out the same person. Prison always breaks people in some way, and this is especially true where torture was or is involved. I believe that artists as intellectuals should strive for peace by taking the balanced way to ensure things do not hit that dangerous mark. A good artist takes no sides, but assumes a position from where he or she fights for the suffering mass by reminding Government of their duty to serve public interest. It is also the role of artists as intellectuals to remind those entrusted with playing the checks and balance of their roles and limitations if democracy is to work.

During the one party era, Malawi saw most of her cream of writers incarcerated. Jack Mapanje, Felix Mnthali, Sam Mpasu, name them, have all been before prison walls. Elsewhere, we have read of the death of Christopher Okigbo during the Biafra War (1967-1970) in Nigeria, and those who admire the power of the pen know what a great talent Africa lost with that death in 1968.

In short, I think intellectuals should never derelict from their duty to lead in debate for peace, and this should not wait till things reach explosive levels. At the same time, I do not believe the roles of an artist are cast in stone; I think they depend on the context.

A writer in peace has no room to bring instability, but to preserve and perfect that peace. In the same way, a writer under a dictatorship has no room to play sycophant, to perpetuate oppression. Similarly, even their approach to writing depends on context. It will be foolhardy to go in direct against dictators who have no regard to life. This is the reason Malawian writers in the Banda dictatorship resorted to huge metaphors, a language only the initiated deciphered.

So, where stands the three roles of the artist?

Well, there are many roles of an artist, for example, the writer as a teacher, or as society’s conscience. I find restricting myself to the three roles problematic, or am I confusing roles with approaches (broach philosophy)?

My one-time teacher, good Reuben Makayiko Chirambo (Late) in “Teaching Political Poetry for Democracy in Malawi: a Justification” quotes Omafume Onoge (1974) as observing that there appears to be three tendencies in post-independence African literature when explaining the relationship between a work of art, for example, poetry, and the society in which it exists. These tendencies are (1) critical realism; (2) social realism; and (3) art for art’s sake.

Chirambo says critical realism is “represented by writers who are prepared to criticize the political and social reality around them, often at the risk of their lives from the wrath of the state” (p 73). Perhaps a good example of a critical realist is the Democratic Republic of Congo’s dramatist, Tandundu E.A Bisikisi, who was arrested on December 8, 1977 at the age of only 22 for criticising the Zairean dictator, Mobutu Sese Seko. In the “Theatre”, Bisikisi observes that a detachment of commandos armed to the teeth came to arrest him at the Lubumbashi University Campus, accusing him of ‘political subversion and threatening the security of the State’.

The ‘sin’ Bisikisi had committed was publish a play L’Aller et Le Retour ou La Mort de l’Université translated Forward and Back, or the Death of the University. According to Bisikisi,

In it, without mincing my words, I criticised the University reforms (nationalization and politicization of the University) instituted by General Mobutu and announced the death of the University of Zaire. The play ended with these words, which say it all: ‘The University is dead, long live the Republic! The Republic is dead, long live the President! Long live the President.’ . . . The play exploded like a bomb in the university and intellectual community in general, and everyone was in agreement—this was what really mattered—with my main argument: the University of Zaire was dead (see “The Theatre” by Tandundu E.A. Bisikisi in Gathering Seaweed: African Prison Writing, p 280).

On why he had to risk it, at the same page (280), Bisikisi confesses: “No, I could not remain silent. It was stronger than I.”

Jack Mapanje himself is in the category of Bisikisi.

On social realism, Chirambo observes that it and critical realism are one and the same thing only that social realism surpasses critical realism by a length. This is because “social realism implies the artist’s fundamental agreement with the aims of the working class and emerging socialist world of the oppressed mass.” Thus, a writer as a social realist “not only points out the ills but identifies with those who suffer those ills and suggests a solution—often a revolution against the oppressors” (p 73).

During the Biafran Civil War in Nigeria (1967-1970), Chinua Achebe and Christopher Okigbo sided with the seceding Biafra. Okigbo lost his life in 1968 in battle, defending his university. I find the two good examples of social realists.

As for the third category—art for art’s sake—the writer preoccupies himself or herself with perfecting his or her art, walking in the rut of literature. On this, Chirambo observes that even innocent art carries with it some hidden message. I agree with Chirambo it can’t be art that which hides its face from the suffering of the people.

Is the modern day Malawian writer a critical realist who should take Government head on regardless of the prize? Is he or she a social realist who should ransack the cushions in every Government House, turning them inside out for all to see while identifying himself or herself with the suffering masses? Or should he or she just take his way, observing from a distance, preoccupying himself or herself with art as his or her main concern?

I would never answer that question directly, because contexts differ. The setting in Britain is not the same as that in Malawi or Egypt or South Sudan, et cetera. In Africa, the mechanisms that check against abuse of power—the integrity systems—are so weak, at times one would think they do not exist at all. At the same time, illiteracy level among the citizens is so pathetically low, one has to assume the role of a civic educator, balancing the need for peace and the need for free expression, et cetera.

What it all means is that if an artist misunderstands the capacity of the people to destroy and leads them the revolutionary path, the damage is often irreparable. The Arab Spring in Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, et cetera are bloody examples of what revolutions can breed. As Chinua Achebe observed, sometimes you cannot know what you will bring forth. His fear was that sometimes you can replace a better one for a worse one.

As an artist, I take the same position. I value peace above anything else. I go for peace at whatever cost. This is why I take the stand that the best any nation can do is to talk, talk, talk and talk. Definitely, there is always a point where the majority can justify a side that has been long-suffering and patient and weigh in for them, at that moment even the integrity systems begin to believe change is necessary.

So what is the role of the Malawian artist today?

Well, to play the teacher on the ways of peace and dialogue. To keep assuring the people long-suffering and patience in a context of talking pays. When all that has failed, the writer can then side with the people, to give up everything he or she has for them, but this is the last, last resort, which, must never appear at all.

In the context of our politics, as artists we must carry the pain and show all sides why it is necessary that we must talk to straighten our politics. This means we must accept that even where everything seems not to be working, we must encourage all sides to exercise caution for the sake of peace.

I often say the artist sides with the people. True, but most of these people know very little of rule of law, and that is where the problem is. In siding with the people, the writer has a duty to teach them what democracy means, why peace at all costs is a necessity, and when a people can finally say, “Enough is enough.”

The writer, as a person who reads widely, should prepare himself or herself to lead his or her people in understanding the rule of law, their rights to demand, and, at the same time, their responsibilities to peace-building.

The writer also has the job to make those in power realise the people are tired, their patience is wearing thin, and that a new mode of serving is required. This does not mean changing leadership, for changing leadership has never solved any problem in Africa.

History and Relevance of the Public Affairs Committee in 2017

Lately, there have been questions over whether the quasi-religious organisation the Public Affairs Committee (PAC) still holds relevant today, 25 years after it was established. I have been one of those arguing that the role of PAC has changed and PAC ought to revisit its objectives to make itself more relevant in the chapter or stage of our democracy and governance today. As usual, this position has been misunderstood or deliberately twisted to mean PAC should no longer exist, that it is a body irrelevant. And guess who the most vehement proponents of this position have been, I mean those who have viewed PAC as a thorn in the flesh—politicians, and most of them those from the ruling DPP. It should be made clear here that the presence of PAC is more relevant today than ever before, but that its objectives ought to reflect the time in which we are living to make itself more relevant and responsive to the needs at hand. This does not mean and should not mean to say PAC is irrelevant. If PAC is irrelevant, then which body will be relevant to represent the close to 18 million people packed in this now little space we call Malawi?

One problem with PAC arises from the nature of its formation which had a strong opposition politics within its ranks. Of course, PAC itself loves to demonstrate that it has no DNA politics in its blood. For example, their website says, “the founders are Malawi Law Society, Malawi Chamber of Commerce, CCAP Blantyre Synod, CCAP Livingstonia Synod, CCAP General Synod, Diocese of Lake Malawi of Anglican Church, Diocese of Southern Malawi of Anglican Church, Episcopal Conference of Malawi, Malawi Council of Churches and Muslim Association of Malawi” (www.pacmw.org). However, its true composition and makeup at inception is best summarized in The UMCA in Malawi: A History of the Anglican Church 1861-2010 by James Tengatenga (Editor), once the body’s Chairperson. At page28, the Author (Editor) observes:

In 1992 at the Malawi Council of Churches meeting chaired by Bishop Peter Nyanja (Late), a body was formed to deal with the political situation in the country. The body formed was named the Public Affairs Committee of the Churches in Malawi (PAC). Since political organisation of any kind was prohibited by law (i.e. Article 4 of the old Constitution, i.e. the 1966 Constitution), the Committee brought in political pressure groups (underground political parties) under its wing, the Law Society of Malawi and others.

It is important to note that there was no way the Public Affairs Committee could have been efficient if it hadn’t incorporated the sentiments or voice of the political pressure groups. It is also important to note that the main goal of PAC at first was to bring in Referendum, and this is the whole reason that before the Referendum, PAC was known as PACREM, i.e. the Public Affairs Committee for Referendum Monitoring. And of course, after the Referendum, when going towards the General Elections, PACREM came to be described as PACGEM, this time for the General Elections Monitoring.

The other problem with PAC has always been what history has shown us that some PAC members had used the body as a springboard into mainstream politics. On this, Ross (1995) at page 34, observes:

On the one hand, some church leaders became so involved in the political arena that they eventually left the church ministry in order to devote themselves to politics. From Blantyre Synod, Rev Peter Kaleso became AFORD Vice-President before later joining the (former ruling United Democratic Front) UDF and becoming ambassador to South Africa. . . From the Baptist Church, Emmanuel Chinkwita became first a shadow cabinet minister and parliamentary candidate then later ambassador to Mozambique. (Religion in Malawi No 5, November 1995)

Because some of the politicians in the ruling party were once part of the pressure group for change from 1992 onwards, they (these politicians in the ruling party) have clear knowledge of this history, and so view PAC with greatest suspicion. However, regardless of this, PAC is the single most important structure that presents the highest levels of checks against abuse of power in the country. For this, no government has ever shared a bed with PAC; the only time politicians agree with PAC is when they are on the opposition benches.

Perhaps I should also mention that much as one has the freedom to associate with any political grouping of his or her choice (as guarantees section 40 of the Constitution on Political Rights), the exercise of this right has not helped PAC much when some of its members have ended up in mainstream politics as though PAC is a springboard into mainstream politics. This has raised questions in many as to the apolitical nature of PAC.

Another problem created by this tendency by PAC members to end up in mainstream politics has been the country’s inability to build statesmen or elders. I would define a statesman or stateswoman as a person very well educated in a diverse facets of life, and very well experienced in many sides of life and society. Lessons and knowledge gained from all these, eventually make him or her abandon self for all, and refuse to identify with a particular grouping unless it is for the total service of the people, all the people. In Malawi, the people who should have played the ‘elders’ all end up joining politics and begin to live the life of politicians whose engine is run on lies, greed and snobbery. It is for this reason that I always mourn that we lost Professor Lazarus Chakwera to mainstream politics. For me, that man should have formed the elder, that pivotal character for reconciliation. I had looked at him as Malawi’s Tutu until some fella convinced him to abandon the chapel for the hot podium of politics. I am not blaming him; it is his right to so do; I am only expressing my disappointment or frustration that someone I had looked to, to play the Malawi Tutu eventually stands on two toes, exchanging words with Philistines.

Desmond Tutu of South Africa is a man who should have been easily gone politics, but lo, he did not. He had used everything around him to build himself and his people. When that which he had wanted to achieve was accomplished, i.e. the dismantling of apartheid, he chose a different path—speaking for the people against the new paternalist, this time in the person of a fellow black man and woman in the name of the African National Congress of men like Jacob Zuma.

Kenneth R Ross in “The Renewal of the State by the Church: The Case of the Public Affairs Committee in Malawi” describes the 1992 Sunday, March 8 Lenten Pastoral Letter entitled Living our Faith, issued by the Roman Catholic Bishops, as a kind of trigger, and the works of PAC as the dismantling apparatus of the one-party regime in what he describes as the ‘velvet revolution’, i.e. great political transformations ‘with relatively minimal violence’.

On the Pastoral Letter as the trigger, Ross observes:

Rarely in modern times can a church document have had such an immediately explosive affect in the life of a nation. Within four days (of its release), the (then ruling) Malawi Congress Party was convened in an emergency session to pass an unreserved condemnation of the Bishops. Possession of the letter was declared to be an act of sedition, punishable by severe penalties. There were unrestrained calls at the Party Convention for the Bishops to be killed. When this was followed by a leader entitled ‘No Mercy’ in the Government-controlled newspaper (then, i.e. Malawi News, and dated 14-20 March, 1992), experienced observers feared the Bishops were being set up for assassination. (Kenneth R Ross, “The Renewal of the State by the Church: The Case of the Public Affairs Committee in Malawi” in Religion in Malawi, No 5, November, 1995, Zomba: Department of Theology and Religious Studies, Chancellor College, University of Malawi, p 30).

Allow me to digress a little here so I can demonstrate why I had to appreciate the manner the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Samuel Tembenu, handled the sentiments by Archbishop Msusa (at the just-ended PAC Conference) as regards how the public broadcaster twisted his words. Tembenu’s handling contrasts sharply with the manner in which the MCP had handled the sentiments in the 1992 Lenten Pastoral Letter, a situation that had aggravated the situation on the ground against the mighty MCP.

In 1992, although the general public had fully supported the stance by the Bishops, the immediate open stance and support for the Bishops had come from Catholic Students of the University of Malawi especially Chancellor College in Zomba, where, on 15th March (1992) “issued a letter entitled ‘We support our Bishops’ and it included the following statements:

“We praise and congratulate you for your courage in bringing out the Lenten Pastoral Letter Living our Faith. Undoubtedly, this Pastoral Letter will go down in our history as the most soul-searching document on current realities that have ever come out . . . As your daughters and sons, we have been deeply distressed by the horrible insults and open abuses against you and the whole Malawian Catholic Church . . . The We-Support-our-Bishops Walk held on Sunday 15th March, 1992 from Chancellor College to Zomba Cathedral for Mass, followed by a visit to the Bishop’s House, bears testimony to our unflinching solidarity for you and what you stand for” (Ross, p 36).

Following that march (and of course, demonstrations by University students in Blantyre), Chancellor College, the main University campus was closed, and according to Ross, this was the first time in the history of the University of Malawi that a University campus could be closed (p 31). However, it should be noted that the students had risen to the occasion following the intimidation to the Bishops, for:

They (the MCP) quickly proscribed it and declared it a seditious document. Possession of the letter became a crime. The Malawi Young Pioneers (Dr Banda’s personal army) set fire to Montfort Media at Balaka where it (the Pastoral Letter) had been printed. One of the signatories of the letter, Monsignor John Roche, an Irishman, was deported. Recordings of an emergency meeting of the MCP held in Lilongwe on 11 March, 1992, revealed calls by senior MCP officials to kill the Bishops (Muluzi, Bakili; Juwayeyi, Yusuf, M; Makhambera, Mercy and Phiri, Desmond D, 1999, Democracy with a Price: The History of Malawi since 1900, p 140).

Following this defiance, events took an ugly turn for the then ruling Malawi Congress Party, for come April 6, 1992, Chakufwa Chihana, the Malawian Secretary-General of the Southern African Trade Union Coordinating Council, returned to Malawi. He was arrested upon arrival at Kamuzu International Airport right on the Airport tarmac (and he was to “spend the next 14 months in prison, first at Zomba Central Prison, and later at Mikuyu Detention Prison . . .(to be) released on 12 June 1993, two days before the National Referendum” (Democracy with a Price, p 141).

It should be pointed out that although Chihana had been incarcerated that long, the defiant gesture he had given those few seconds before his arrest in his support for the Pastoral Letter and the need for political reform was enough to galvanise even more resolve in the people to stand up against the one party regime of Dr Hastings Kamuzu Banda. Then, later the same April, “an unprecedented wave of strikes swept both the public and private sectors, forcing the government to implement massive wage rises. The strikes were accompanied by rioting and looting directed particularly at property identified with the Malawi Congress Party” (Ross, p 31).

According to Democracy with a Price, p 140, at least 38 people were shot dead by the police during the time.

Back to my point on the March 8 1992 playing the trigger and PAC the machinery to guide the change.

Well, the escalation of the riots meant the nation had to do something to redirect the people and bring sanity in a context of normality to achieve the ‘velvet revolution’. It came to this: the Catholic Church had set it in motion, and the Presbyterians, who for long had been closely identified with the Malawi Congress Party, had to be seen to do something. This is how PAC was born, i.e. the World Alliance of Reformed Churches to which the Church of Central Africa Presbyterian encouraged a meeting with the MCP leadership to build on the work initiated by the Catholic Bishops.

In early June the World Alliance of Reformed Churches sent a delegation to meet with the leaders of the Presbyterian churches in Malawi and together they presented an open letter to the Life President entitled ‘The Nation of Malawi in Crisis: the Church’s Concern’. . . Practical proposals were needed. The church leaders accordingly called for the appointment of a broadly based Commission with the mandate to ‘make specific proposals for structural reform towards a political system with sufficient checks and balances on the use of power, the guarantees of accountability at all levels of government; to review the judicial. . . (Ross, p 31)

In simple terms, PAC was formed to play the vehicle for the nation to go the multiparty way the smooth way. It achieved this through PACREM and PACGEM. After that, we have a Constitution. Their role now is to ensure, every person abides by this. This body has played a crucial role in defending the Constitution, in fact, as far as I am concerned, better than the judiciary and the legislature together. As far as I am concerned, there have been two bodies that have protected our democracy better—the Public Affairs Committee and the media. Many things would have gone awry if we did not have the Public Affairs Committee and the private media.

I know many people would find such sentiments funny.

Well, the judiciary in Malawi have often never been forthcoming and unanimous on important issues. The question of section 65—crossing the floor—is still a problem today thanks to our courts. I know they will say, “Well, that issue was resolved long time ago, see the June 15, 2007 In the Matter of the Question of Crossing Floor by Members of the National Assembly before the Honourable Justices Kalaile, Tambala, Mtambo, and Tembo.” Well, thank you very much if that’s what you call solving a mind-boggling constitutional problem.

If anybody would come to replace or form a parallel structure with PAC, I doubt it would carry the same respect and sting PAC do. If PAC have a problem today, it is not that they are doing their watchdog role the wrong way; it is because they feel let down that what is obvious is never followed to the letter. There is nothing wrong with this. However, the most important message to PAC is: please, take the long-suffering way by sticking to talking, talking and more talking. I know the question will be when talking can become obsolete.

First, talking can never become obsolete, and this is why nations at war still find time to talk so as to still salvage something despite the belligerence.

Second, talking is like pouring water into some pail. If you keep pouring, the level keeps rising and then the pail overflows. At that moment, it does not require anyone asking; the situation shall tell the pail is overflowing and something ought to be done. This is the same thing that happened at the dawn of multiparty. Things just came to that point where the pail overflowed and change was inevitable. I do not believe we have reached that point or state yet.

It is important to note at this point that the sentiments that PAC ‘is obsolete’ started way back before the birth of multiparty Malawi. Ross, commenting on sentiments from The Daily Times dated 9 November, 1993, observes at page 34:

When legislation was being passed in Parliament to establish the National Consultative Council and the National Executive Committee as the bodies which would oversee the transition to multi-party political system, the Public Affairs Committee declined to be represented and thus left the process of reform entirely in the hands of the political parties. This allowed the Government later to claim that PAC was a body which had a role only in the pre-Referendum period and which was now obsolete.

Should the Public Affairs Committee revisit their objectives?

Certainly yes.

The original composition and makeup of PAC as was founded in 1992 comprised the religious community and other pressure groups in Malawi with the purpose to enter into a dialogue with Kamuzu Banda’s Presidential Committee on Dialogue in the transition period from the one-party system to the multiparty system of government in Malawi (see www.pacmw.org). The Public Affairs Committee had a different role in the pre-Referendum era as in the pre-General Elections era. This means that the PAC after the General Elections should definitely be a PAC with a complex purpose owing to the complex nature of the time we are living in. When people call for PAC to revisit its objectives, it is in line with the complexity of the era, and how that it requires to reinvent itself to better address the current complex problems in our democracy. This does not mean and should be seen to mean that PAC is a seriously political organisation, and so, obsolete.

The Theme, Issues deliberated and the Malawi Context

The theme of the Conference this year was ‘The State of Governance and Public Trust: Reclaiming our Destiny’. People have asked whether this theme wasn’t an effrontery, a deliberate attempt to ruffle feathers. I personally don’t think so. This theme is appropriate. It does not do anything wrong to the ruling DPP except to remind them what they know, what they promised to do to Malawians through their own brilliantly laid out manifesto under an equally well churned and enticing banner—“Towards a People’s Centred Government”. And for your information, the last line on the 2014 DPP Manifesto reads: “A Government we can Trust”.

At page 7, the Manifesto says, “The people of Malawi want a government they can trust, a government that can deliver on its promises, a government that prioritises their needs.”

At page 8, it says, almost shaming the then ruling People’s Party, “The economy is in shambles; the cost of living is skyrocketing; political aggrandizement, self-glorification, and massive corruption are the order of the day.”

Now the question is: Is the economy in shambles? Is the cost of living skyrocketing? Is there political aggrandizement? How about self-glorification and massive corruption? If the answer to all these is yes, then why should PAC not feel justified to choose this theme?

Pillar xiv in the Executive Summary of the DPP Manifesto is a great promise too:

Appointment and removal of the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Malawi, Director of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, the Auditor General, the Director of Public Prosecution, Clerk of Parliament, Malawi Human Rights Commission Executive Secretary, the Malawi Law Commissioner, Director General of the Malawi Broadcasting Corporation, MACRA Director General, and leaders of other accountability institutions shall be on merit through a special public appointments committee. Merit will also be observed in appointments and removal of chief executive officers and board members of parastatals.

How about Pillar Xii of this Executive Summary: “The DPP will reduce concentration of power in the Presidency”?

And how about Pillar v: “Upgrading the teaching profession”?

Well, the DPP Manifesto is a great instrument of hope. Whosoever drafted that thing knew what Malawi needed. It was great to analyse and arrive at the solutions on paper. Today, the people are reminding the DPP to live the spirit of their own document on principles of trust, et cetera. I see nothing wrong with this. I think the DPP should smile that the people can help remind them of these great promises. For me the theme was relevant. Perhaps where I find problem is that most Malawians do not study the context and understand that policy issues can fail or produce unintended consequences. When that happens it requires to discuss and revise the policy option or options.

I think the language of the DPP should not be denial, but acknowledging that, owing to a number of situations on the ground, some things have not produced intended consequences. Again, the DPP should keep pleading with Malawians to give them time because problems of 53 years can never be resolved within a short period of time. Sometimes, it is even prudence to acknowledge that some promises were merely meant to win over the people. Muluzi did this on shoes when he later turned on the people asking whether it is reality to expect him to know everyone’s shoe size. Well, at campaign, Muluzi had promised to buy every Malawian some shoes once voted into power. When the people demanded the shoes, he never lacked sentences to counter it amidst laughter.

When PAC challenges us, they are doing their job. Let us plead with them for more time because these are complex problems. This way, this nation shall achieve so much in so short a time.

The Conference and Ultimatums

I personally fear ultimatums. In history most ultimatums ended in bloodshed. Again, ultimatums, for me, demonstrate a people’s inability to resolve their differences through talking. The stage at which we are as Malawians, we cannot afford strikes and demonstrations. Not that it is bad to go on strike or to demonstrate, but these things often live a people more broken, and a nation more polarized. We must never get tired of talking. I personally feel ultimatums not good in the spirit of negotiation. I understand when people resort to ultimatums but history should teach us that ultimatums force one group into a corner where it becomes easy for them to believe in force to survive. We must respect our enemy.

Honestly, there is nothing great than your enemy showing you they respect you despite your differences. Allow me to say something simple yet great that moved Desmond Tutu when young to believe that regardless all failures and evil about people, there are some who transcend all borders of vice for the good of all humans.

In apartheid South Africa, it was unheard of for a white man to give respect to a black man or woman. But one white man, Trevor Huddleston, did something that inspired Tutu to believe in humanity. It is said, one day while walking with his mother, “a white man, a priest named Trevor Huddleston, tipped his hat to her—the first time he had ever seen a white man pay this respect to a black woman. The incident made a profound impression on Tutu, teaching him that he need not accept discrimination and that religion could be a powerful tool for advocating racial equality” (see www.biography.com/people/desmondtutu accessed 13 June 2017).

The Public Affairs Committee has a duty to exercise restraint so the people can learn from ‘small acts’ and change. I have no problem with the theme ‘The State of Governance and Public Trust: Reclaiming our Destiny’, because governance and trust are intertwined and they form the basis of existence of democracy—the people trust the Government to govern, and the Government governs in their interest or else the people should feel justified to question.

Starting a parallel body to PAC

Those who think the answer to demands or ultimatums is to start a new body to engage Government their own way are reading it all-wrong. Such people do not take into perspective the wider context. Whenever you disagree with some system, the answer is not to start your own or to dismantle that system your own way; the answer is in talking to reach a compromise. If this were the case, I mean that every time we disagree with some system then the answer should be breaking away, then the people should not have been expressing reservations with the North calling for federalism or even a complete breakaway. Once this body is born, it will justify a feeling that whenever we are not given what we demand, the answer should be secession. I don’t think that is the way to go. The way to go is to find out what it is that is breeding disillusionment, and then address the same with speed.

Do not strive to be that initiator of a project that will stand to laugh at you the rest of your life. In history, there is always some fella, who, without looking in the mirror of future, seeks to benefit by what appears now, and so treads in where even angels fear to. I have two examples on this: the first one involves a wily old ‘native’ carpenter who, for love of money, betrayed a number of John Chilembwe followers during the 1915 John Chilembwe Rising; and the second, on that blot on our democracy, Third Term Bill.

In 1915, Reverend John Chilembwe, American trained theologian, led a rising against serfdom in European estates, especially those by AL Bruce. Andrew C Ross sums up the reasons in Blantyre Mission and the Making of the Modern Malawi:

The Blantyre Mission Magazine, from 1891 up till almost the eve of the attack on the Livingstone Bruce Estates, had constantly warned of the dangers of the continuance of a system akin to serfdom in the European owned estates in the Southern Region of the country. This (serfdom or thangata) was the basic cause of the bitterness on the part of the indigenous people of Malawi, and it is agreed by most authorities that it was a particularly unpleasant form of this relationship on the Bruce Estates that triggered off the Rising. There were other reasons: unhappiness about the status of the African in his own country, exemplified by the refusal of the Protectorate authorities to accept African evidence in court as being on par with that given by a European.

The Rising began on January 23 and on February 4, same year when John Chilembwe was killed with the help of a fellow native, the people the white man described as ‘lying, thieving and polygamous niggers’.

Among the Europeans killed were William Jervis Livingstone (he was manager of Magomero section of AL Bruce Estates, and was decapitated in presence of his family) and Duncan MacCormick (a planter for AL Bruce Estates).

After Chilembwe’s death, anybody connected to the ‘rebels’, as Chilembwe and his lieutenants were described, was dealt with without mercy, and most of them ended up being hanged, lashed or condemned to various terms of imprisonment.

The second-in-command in the Rising was John Gray Kufa. As a top ‘rebel’, he was the interest of Nyasaland Government forces as well as Volunteers (both white and black or natives) helping them. And guess the person who betrayed John Gray Kufa. Well, the news of where John Gray Kufa was hiding was supplied to the white man by an old ‘native’ carpenter on the look-out for money. The Nyasaland Government had placed a reward of £20 on John Gray Kufa’s head, and Shepperson and Price say,

The fact that a Government reward of £20 was on John Gray Kufa’s head no doubt stimulated the old man to provide a personal reconnaissance patrol among the local villagers. He (the old ‘native’ carpenter) thus brought in the news that rebel second-in-command was not far away; that he was, indeed, out in the bush, hiding behind a small hill. A force of six Africans, armed with rifles, were sent out to capture John Gray Kufa. The old carpenter went with them and played a leading part in taking him (p 312).

The most shameful part of this whole thing is that John Gray Kufa had been captured by fellow ‘natives’, a grouping taking advantage of the situation to enrich themselves at the expense of the people. These people were so overzealous, they had formed a grouping even when the main search body of whites (and some ‘natives’) was still away in a neighbouring village. Shepperson and Price have this to say on this: “It appears that for the latter part of the night of Thursday, 28 January, and for the early morning of Friday, 29 January, the old carpenter and six armed Africans were out in the bush after John Gray Kufa, while the main body of the Mikolongwe volunteers (white volunteers together with African soldiers and mercenaries quelling the Rising), all together again, were in the village about eight miles from Chilembwe’s church” (p 312). The carpenter and these six African soldiers, had the opportunity to hide their fellow ‘native’, but here they were, facilitating, no, not facilitating, but leading in the capture of John Gray Kufa, selling this precious African for £20.

Perhaps I should point out this John Gray Kufa was no ordinary man as far as the life of a fellow ‘native’ was concerned:

In 1898 John Gray Kufa passed the surgical examination set by the Blantyre Medical Missionaries with 90 per cent marks, and was clearly marked out as the nearest thing to an African doctor in the (Nyasaland) Protectorate. Work in school and church, and proficiency in medicine approved by the Scottish doctors with their high standards, gave him a position of special trust in the Blantyre Mission. He was soon the foremost native assistant in its hospital and was entrusted with work in the dispensary (p 243).

It is this asset of a man that these ‘natives’ had sold for £20. These people go down in history as representative of everything shame about their nation as far as struggle for Independence and self-rule is concerned. And the direct involvement of John Gray Kufa in the Rising perhaps justifies it was a cause worth it, for a man of his stature at the time had everything to protect and enjoy for himself. Fortunately, Kufa did not view life from that jaundiced position. For him, it meant nothing to live in hedonism while your people were knee high in poverty.

The issue of Third Term Bill is the most recent example of the extent to which a people can go to defend their grip to power.

In case you need some reminder, Third Term Bid was a move by the then ruling United Democratic Front to change the Constitution so Dr Bakili Muluzi should stand again. Although the move had started way before 1999 when Muluzi was entering his second and final term, it became a great issue from May 2002 when “over 185 village headmen in Chiradzulu East Constituency had asked their Member of Parliament, Henry Mussa (current Minister for Sports and Labour), to support an amendment to the Constitution to allow unlimited terms of office for the State President” (Muula and Chanika, p 41).

Everything set to butcher the Constitution, there was a need for someone to do the initial knifing. And the ‘opportunity’ availed itself, not from the then ruling UDF, but from a party who were all along known for playing a pivotal role in change from one party system to multiparty system of government—Alliance for Democracy—AFORD. That ‘opportunity’ came in the person of Khwauli Msiska, Member of Parliament for Karonga Nyungwe Constituency. According to Muula and Chanika, on June 5, 2002, AFORD’s National Executive Council resolved to let Mr Msiska present before the National Assembly the Open Term Bill. It was defeated. When it came again as Third Term Bill, it suffered a similar fate.

In Malawi, those who bring shame to politics are rewarded rather than reprimanded. Although Msiska was censured by the Board for Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation where he was board member of the organisation (can you believe that?), his Constituents later gave him another mandate as MP. In the case of Henry Mussa, he is now current Minister of Sports and Labour in the ruling DPP. It is no surprise perhaps because our politics subsists from greed, lust for wealth, or a proclivity to corruption (see John Lwanda’s “Changes in Malawi’s Political Landscape between 1999 and 2004: Nkhope ya Agalatia” (2004). In Martin Ott, Bodo Immink, Bhatupe Mhango and Christian Peters-Berries (Eds) The Power of the Vote: Malawi’s 2004 Parliamentary and Presidential Elections. Zomba: Kachere Series, p 68).

It should be pointed out that PAC had played a significant role to derail the Third Term Project, and this is because PAC has always been a resilient body and those serving therein a people with that heart of a lion. The Public Affairs Committee survived the MCP era, and nothing today can compare with the danger it faced at the turn of the multiparty politics. The Public Affairs Committee withstood it all and came out unscathed. The following two stories as cited by Kenneth R Ross in his inspiring article “The Renewal of the State by the Church: The Case of the Public Affairs Committee in Malawi” speaks volumes on this.

“Even after the PAC-PCD dialogue had begun,” writes Ross, “the intimidation continued” (p 32). Ross then documents what Amnesty International had documented surrounding a series of assassination attempts on the (then) Acting PAC Chairman Rev Emmanuel Chinkwita:

The most recent incident occurred on 4 January, 1993, when Rev Chinkwita was at a bus stop on the outskirts of Lilongwe late at night. A car drove at high speed directly at him and he was only saved by a friend who pulled him out of its path. Eye-witnesses believed that the car had deliberately aimed to hit him. On two separate earlier occasions, in November and December 1992, it appeared that he had been the victim of an attempt to poison him by impregnating his clothes with organo-phosphate poisons, which function by interfering with the transmission of nerve impulses, leading to impairment of basic body functions and, in some cases, to irreversible damage and death (Malawi: Preserving the One-Party State—Human Rights Violations and the Referendum, London: Amnesty International, 18 May, 1993, p 10 as cited by Ross, p 32).

Ross also quotes an interview (dated 16 November, 1994) with Rev Misanjo Kansilanga on the threats he faced as PAC Secretary then. Kansilanga observed:

“MCP top brass went to our home areas and informed our relatives that we were not good people. We had become rebels. They were inciting people in our home areas to bash our cars, to burn our property and all sorts of things. I lost a whole granary in my home area and my two houses were burnt down during the Referendum campaign period. . . My car was stoned and I was followed on several occasions—a car following me wherever I went. So we knew that we were in danger.” (Ross, p 33)

For Reverend Kansilanga, even his relatives had come to the point of throwing in the towel, pleading with him to please withdraw his involvement in PAC. But Rev Kansilanga’s response was courage and defiance, for he told them, “I am not doing my own thing. I did not choose this. But I believe that this is God’s work. If it is God’s work then it is God himself who has life in his hands, so if I am killed praises will go to God and you shouldn’t cry” (Ross, p 33).

Even during the Bakili Muluzi era, PAC had rarely been considered a friend. When Muluzi wanted to change the Constitution to stand for another term, it was PAC that sacrificed itself to ensure the sanctity of the Constitution was respected.

I’m afraid whoever will attempt to form a parallel PAC body shall occupy the same chapter in our history books as the old carpenter in the Chilembwe Rising, and Khwauli Msiska in the Third Term Bid. However, people have every right to establish any gathering, for the Constitution provides for the same. But, as a writer, I have a duty to show them history and advise them the best way forward is discussing because, to quote the then PAC Chair Bishop Tarsisius Ziyaye at the May 1995 Round table on Tolerance and Reconciliation, as cites Ross (p 35), “Nobody will come from outside to find solutions to our problems . . . collectively we should endeavor to find solutions instead of pointing fingers at each other.”

So, what am I saying? Well, that we still must talk, talk, talk and talk. Talk to eternity? Yes, if that permits. With no solution in sight? Well, I always believe that some talk plus patience and perseverance always brings in some answer.

Put simply, our answer shouldn’t be starting something new; that is not the way to go when we have a difference. Husbands or wives do not always go for someone new every time they disagree within themselves. I would personally discourage anyone proposing starting their own body mimicking PAC. However, people have a freedom of choice, though our history is littered with names of those who had used this freedom to bring discord upon themselves.

Has the just ended PAC Conference achieved anything?

First of all, PAC Conferences should never be measured by whether they have achieved anything or not, or the degree to which they have achieved anything; they should be measured by how much opportunity and room for debate they have offered Malawians and their Government to engage in peace and arrive at solutions, together. As far this is concerned, this just-ended PAC Conference was a success, a great success.

The strikes by the teachers in public schools have come to an end, and the biggest news of it all: the strike by University lectures over pay disparities is said to have come to an end as well. Further, the impending rental hike (of up to 48% in some cases) by the Malawi Housing Corporation has been put on hold. Am I saying all this is because of the PAC Conference? No, what I am saying is that the Conference set the tone for the people to talk. In other words, it indicated that if we would never give peace a chance, we would regret ourselves. As far as setting that conducive environment for self-reflection is concerned, the Conference achieved its objective.

The position of PAC is today more delicate than ever before. The reason is that although its authority the power to enable the people to demand response from Government, the danger lies in the type of people and the extent to which they can exercise that right. The people today seem to cherish lawlessness. On any issue, they love to destroy property (and sad to say, this has gone down to our children as well). As I am writing, three police units have been set alight in Blantyre by minibus operators demonstrating their ‘right’ against stringent rules put in place by the authority to curb road accidents. Most people today want to exercise their freedom but do not understand where that should end. This is the greatest problem facing PAC now. In short, what would happen if PAC would sanction demonstrations and they end up putting our cities and property in flames?

This is why I saw PAC has to redefine its objectives so as to hold Government to account while (at the same time) reasoning and teaching the frustrated masses that self-expression turns into a crime when unleashed on the people and property.

What is required now is wisdom, because the danger when things seem to work in your favour is that people very soon forget that giving in requires humility on the side of the receiver. When one gives in and you interpret that to mean defeat, you risk losing out even the little you have bargained for. I would plea with PAC to exercise patience and make it known they are happy Government can listen to her people. It will be unfortunate not to. At the same time, they should be slow on ultimatums and take a lot of time to teach the people that there are always appropriate channels for addressing grievances and destruction of property has no room in democracy.

The Way Forward for Malawians

The Public Affairs Committee is frustrated. This the people must understand; we have always looked forward to the best type of democracy on the Continent. Their attempt to ultimatums should also be understood, but then, we must reason with PAC that we still need to talk, talk and talk and talk. At the same time, let those in power exercise restraint in their language. It does not help matters when some people are working on behalf of peace and you go on the offensive. I always believe that there is a section of society whose feathers you must never ruffle, because this grouping favours no one except peace and democracy. I strive to be in that category.

Those who look at PAC-Government tussle as an anomaly do not know our history. The Public Affairs Committee and Government live like cats and dogs. In fact, a silent PAC can even scare the Government itself.

Before I close, let me say something on what I want PAC to seriously look into as we strive to solve our problems as Malawians—our past and the need for reconciliation.

Malawi believes in moving forward without addressing her past. Funny. Everybody knows this has never taken us anywhere yet we still love to move on, and this is because we think that when we talk of addressing the past, we are targeting some grouping.

Kenneth R Ross and Fulata L Moyo make a brilliant summary of what this nation needs to do to move forward. Interestingly, this brilliant observation was made far back as 1996 yet over the years nobody has seen reason to pursue these ideas. They observe:

But the Truth Commission by itself is not enough. It could easily be used for cheap political point-scoring. There is a need for a national movement of confession, repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation. The Gospel calls for those who were victims of the abuses of power to forgive those who have wronged them. Equally, it calls those who committed such wrongs to humble themselves so as to accept the offered forgiveness. As a people we need to express a communal repentance. Few were not implicated in the repressive system yet either by being active participants or by going along with it through remaining silent most of us were implicated. Justice must take its course where crimes were committed but it is not the time to point fingers at others. Can church leaders find a means by which the nation as a whole could confess its sins to God and to one another and so to find a way forward on the basis of a sincere repentance? Without such an exercise there will be no cleansing of power, people will remain suspicious of power and it will be just as liable to be abused in the future as it has been in the past. In the Christian perspective there is no transformation without repentance. If we want to see a new kind of power being exercised in the country it has to begin with confession, repentance, forgiveness and reconciliation. (Kenneth R Ross and Fulata L Moyo, “All Exercise of Power is Accountable to God: People and Politics in the New Malawi” in Religion in Malawi, No 6, 1996. Chancellor College, Theology Department, p 41).

How true Ross’s and Fulata’s words sound today. We believe that leadership change is the answer yet we have so many times changed leadership through a democratic means with little or no success. We have blamed everything on the leadership, yet previously we did the same thing—blaming everything on leadership. We changed yet nothing changed. In fact, the more we change, the more we remain the same if not worse. There must be some problem, something that requires more than leadership change definitely.

Mind you corruption is not a new thing. Same Ross and Fulata in the same article had this to say (and once again, this was 1996):

While democracy must be built from the village, we must also beware of any rot setting in at Capitol Hill (goodness me, this was 1996!). Too many stories coming from there tell of politicians using their new found power to enrich themselves (1996!). Many abuses have been eliminated from our national political life but the cancer of corruption seems too hard to cut out. The Government has such vast resources at its disposal that it is a great temptation to use national assets for its own advantage. The difference between making funds available to a good cause and using political patronage to buy off opponents and to reward loyal supporters is a close one. But a very important one to observe if corruption is to be cleaned out of national politics so that it can regain the confidence and respect of the people. Corruption, if unchecked, can strangle our new democracy at birth (and this is 1996!). Now is the time for a true national leadership to stand strongly against it.

Can the DPP heal this nation of corruption? Never. So what can heal this nation of this problem? Well, we must go back in history and find out where we went wrong. If I may say this, we all went wrong in accepting to move forward without healing ourselves, without purging ourselves of the demons of the past. Two, we accepted to give all the powers in the hands of one man, and when we realized our wrong, we refused to collectively agree on the best integrity systems to help us move forward. It started with our first Parliament!

The DPP Manifesto is the best machinery of change on paper, but it has no wheels. Even if Chakwera ascends into power today, do not expect anything to change. It will simply be exchanging one voracious eater for another.

We need no ultimatums; we need to sit down and look at our shame and heal ourselves of it. After that, we can set our integrity systems: courts, anti-corruption commission, et cetera which will be protected from anybody’s influence.

If we find fault with the leadership, why then do we spare Parliament, because, as far as I am concerned, our Parliament has been complicit in many an area of human rights and governance as well. First, these Honourable Members, to defend their lust for wealth and lies, repealed section 64 of the Constitution so no one would take them to account. The section required that MPs had to stick to the original contract with their Constituents or if they wanted to switch parties then they had to seek fresh mandate. It also gave the people power to recall MPs for serious dereliction of their duties in the House.

 

Later, they murdered the Senate (sections 68-72 of the Constitution) right in the foetus stage. The Senate provision was central to the democratic value of inclusiveness. In one case, it aimed to provide checks and balances on the legislative process. The arrangement was that once Parliament passed a bill, that bill would have to go through the Senate for scrutiny before becoming law. “This provision would also have allowed representatives of various interest groups such as women, youth, et cetera to be represented in the Senate to articulate their special concerns and needs, and, above all, enable them to participate in the democratization process” (Ollen Mwalubunju, (2007). “Civil Society”. In Nandini Patel and Lars Svandsand (Eds) Government and Politics in Malawi. Zomba: Kachere Series and Centre for Social Research/Chr. Michelsen Institute, p 287).

 Our MPs can attack the Government on all things but not when it is their welfare. If you give them money for themselves, they, all, including those talking the loudest, agree. They can switch sides anytime and nobody can take them into account. They can choose when to come to Parliament yet are always given all their pay and allowances. So many things have gone wrong in this country because most of these Parliamentarians have no principles. For me, MPs are also leaders, and if the President as a leader is failing this country, they too are complicit. This is why I always say African democracy does not need MPs; District Commissioners do a better job than these MPs.

Conclusion

No person is above this great blessing of a nation GOD gave us; we must do all we can to make it paradise on Earth. No matter who we are, our duty should be to country and her people first. Let us together surge forward to conquer every vice and redefine ourselves as a great people on this Continent. Let, in everything we do, prize Malawi first. This is our time, the only time in which to perform and leave a legacy; we cannot afford to botch it. Let us keep talking, and let us exercise restraint as far as ultimatums are concerned. And those planning to start PAC B, please, the solution is never to secede; the solution is to identify that which chokes us and work, as one people, to root it out for the good of every Malawian. Let us talk less of leadership change; it is no the solution. Finally, finally, refrain from intimidating the people. Malawians have been intimidated enough before, and by forces bigger; I do not see any force that can intimidate a man who spent time in a dungeon. Please, refrain from setting our youths on errands of deaths, errands that will taint their conscience to the grave. And the reason is: there is only one room for the youths today: school and work and peace and future.

The role of the artist in all this is to remind Government that they have a job to do—serving public interest. He or she also ought to remind the people that they have a responsibility to preserve peace, and where aggrieved to use appropriate channels to make their grievances known. We got our democracy; we must perfect it through peaceful means as Malawians, and artists have a job to do to ensure we achieve this great object.

References

Bisikisi, Tandundu E.A. (2002). “Theatre”. In Mapanje, Jack (Ed) Gathering Seaweed: African Prison Writing. Oxford: Heinemann.

Chirambo, Reuben Makayiko (1999). “Teaching Political Poetry for Democracy in Malawi: A Justification”. In Chimombo, Moira (Editor) Lessons in Hope: Education for Democracy in Malawi, Past, Present, Future. National Initiative for Civic Education (NOCE) Series No 1. Zomba: PAC/Nice/CCP.

Lwanda, John (2004). “Changes in Malawi’s Political Landscape between 1999 and 2004: Nkhope ya Agalatia”. In Ott, Martin; Immink, Bodo; Mhango, Bhatupe; and Peters-Berries, Christian (Eds) The Power of the Vote: Malawi’s 2004 Parliamentary and Presidential Elections. Zomba: Kachere Series.

Muluzi, Bakili; Juwayeyi, Yusuf, M; Makhambera, Mercy and Phiri, Desmond D, (1999). Democracy with a Price: The History of Malawi since 1900, Blantyre: Jhango Heinemann.

Muula, Adamson S. and Chanika, Emmie T. (undated) Malawi’s Lost Decade: 1994-2004. Publishers and city not indicated.

Mwalubunju, Ollen (2007). “Civil Society”. In Nandini Patel and Lars Svandsand (Eds) Government and Politics in Malawi. Zomba: Kachere Series and Centre for Social Research/Chr. Michelsen Institute.

Wa Thiong’o, Ngugi (2002). “Toilet Paper”. In Mapanje, Jack (Ed) Gathering Seaweed: African Prison Writing. Oxford: Heinemann.

Ross, Kenneth R. (1995). “The Renewal of the State by the Church: The Case of the Public Affairs Committee in Malawi”. In Religion in Malawi, No 5, November, 1995, Zomba: Department of Theology and Religious Studies, Chancellor College, University of Malawi.

Ross, Kenneth R and Moyo, Fulata L (1996). “All Exercise of Power is Accountable to God: People and Politics in the New Malawi”. Religion in Malawi, No 6, 1996. Zomba: Chancellor College, Theology Department.

Shepperson, George and Price, Thomas (1958 and 2000) Independent African: John Chilembwe and the Nyasaland Rising of 1915. Zomba: Kachere Monograph No 13/CLAIM.

Tengatenga, James (Ed) (2010). The UMCA in Malawi: A History of the Anglican Church 1861-2010. Zomba: Kachere Books No 55 (Originally appeared before 2010 as The History of the UMCA vol 1-3 by the United Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, London).