|
Government has abandoned the Chiefs Council whose formation President Bakili Muluzi announced on June 30, 2001 at a rally in Zomba after launching the Hunger Project.
Muluzi, who made the declaration at a time when his bid for a third term in office issue was hot, said the council would be a link between traditional leaders and government through which the chiefs could forward their needs and complaints.
The president further said that government wanted to establish the council to act as an advisory body to the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC) on activities of traditional leaders.
But after almost two years of the councils existence in interim state, government says there is no need for the council because one already exists.
“We have sought legal advice from Ministry of Justice who have advised that there is already a Chiefs Council in our Act. And we cannot have a separate body called chiefs council when there is already one,” deputy secretary for local government, Owen Chirambo told Nation Online.
Section 13 of the Chiefs Act reads: “Where the President has removed a person from the office of chief and is of the opinion that no other person is suitable for appointment to such office, he may appoint a chiefs council to perform the function of that office.”
However, Senior Chief Kaomba who was heading the interim committee of the council, says he has not received any communication from government on the abandonment and as such he couldn’t comment on the move.
He added that chiefs are longing for a revised Chiefs Act because the current one doesn’t cater for needs of modern days.
But speaking in an interview, secretary for local government Willy Samute said it is not the responsibility of the ministry to inform chiefs of the abandonment.
“We are simply advising the chiefs on the change,” said Samute adding that his ministry is still sourcing views from traditional leaders on a new Chiefs Act.
Kaomba’s chiefs council which had full support of the state President was ditched at a time Muluzi was away in Japan.
“Actually that was expected because from the beginning there was no need for a chiefs council. Everybody knew the council was there to support the failed Open Term and Third Term bills,” says National Democratic Alliance (NDA) publicity secretary, Salule Masangwi.
“It was unfortunate to have the council in Necof [National Electoral Consultative Forum]. Now that the council is over we are happy,” added Masangwi who is also head of mathematics and statistics department at the University of Malawi constituent of college of Polytechnic.
Masangwi said the existence of the council was doing more harm than good to chiefs because the traditional leaders were there to “advance motives of the UDF” thus, losing their integrity.
University of Malawi political scientist Blessings Chinsinga said he welcomes the end of the chiefs council because “it was creating an obstacle to the democratisation process.”
Chinsinga, who is currently conducting a study on “The Politics of Poverty Alleviation in the Context of Political and Administrative Reforms” for partial fulfillment of his Ph.D, said democracy demands popular leadership, adding in case of Malawi, MPs and councillors elected by popular vote, are more popular than chiefs who are not elected.
“The argument is that elected leaders are more legitimate than traditional leaders,” said Chinsinga.
“What government was doing was to buy the support of chiefs by deliberately making them more powerful so they could support the third term,” said the academic.
He said his research is finding that MPs who receive fat cheques every month are more popular than councillors who aren’t paid. The MPs, he said, are able to share this money with some of their constituents.
“The aim of the government was to win the support of traditional leaders, who are on monthly salary, by giving them more incentives through the chiefs council unfortunately for the sake of the third term bill,” said Chinsinga.
The academic emphasised that in considering abandonment of the chiefs council, people should reason within the context of poverty Malawians are passing through.
Chinsinga described the dissolution of the chiefs council as a triumph for democracy. He added that democracy is a process which goes on and on until maturity.
He said government hijacked the idea of forming an association for chiefs and instead supported a council.
“This was grossly undemocratic,” he said.
Indeed, it was undemocratic because almost a year after Muluzi announced the formation of the council, over 200 chiefs led by Senior Chief Kaomba, had an audience with him on May 20, 2002.
Kaomba told the president that the council had conducted a study in all the three regions of the country and had found out that people wanted Muluzi to stand for a third term.
And a few days later on July 4, 2002, when Parliament rejected the extension of presidential terms, Chief Kaomba said his council was betrayed by MPs who voted against the bill when all Malawians wanted Muluzi to stand.
The chiefs’ stand for third term drew fire from legal practitioners who said the law doesn’t mandate chiefs to do anything on behalf of their people even if they formed a council, which the laws of Malawi don’t allow, anyway.
The chiefs, it was learned, can only form an association not a council. Still some chiefs said the council was working against the customary law on chieftainship in the country.
The civil society had its turn on August 3, 2002, in Mzuzu during a debate organised by National Initiative for Civic Education (Nice) in Mzuzu. During the debate, Kaomba was taken to task to justify the existence of a chiefs council. He said it was the only forum for chiefs in the country to discuss issues of national concern like HIV/Aids.
On October 24, 2002, chiefs in Kasungu where Kaomba comes from, said they wanted a referendum on the issue of third term because by failing to pass the bill, MPs acted against the wishes of people of this country.
And in December of 2002, senior chief Kaomba and government differed on who was funding the chiefs council. While Kaomba said government was funding the council, government, or at least the Ministry of Local Government which looks after traditional leaders, said it hadn’t given any money to the council, let alone buy a car for Kaomba.
Kaomba claimed the car he was using was bought by government, but this was rejected by Local Government principal secretary, Samute. He said government couldn’t fund a council that was being formed.
Conspicuously, when the United Democratic Front (UDF) and Muluzi failed to push third term bill through the back door of Parliament, the chiefs council became dormant. It becomes fair, therefore, to conclude that the chiefs council was a ploy by UDF to brew support for the third term.
The result, as said by commentators, is that UDF has just used or misused and confused traditional leaders because as at now the dissolved council has no direction.
|
