About 15 760 people are participating in a by-election for a councilor in MatenjeWard, Kasungu North West Constituency.
Candidates for governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), opposition Malawi Congress Party (MCP), Mbakuwaku Movement for Development (MMD) and independents are participating in the polls.
UTM Party pulled out of the voting recently, although its candidates standing as independent.
Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) opend polling in the 26 streams in the Ward at 6AM and voting is expected to close at 6PM as per the country’s electoral laws.
Voting in Matenje Ward was supposed to take place simultaneously with that of parliamentarian for Lilongwe South Constituency. However, MEC postponed the by-election in the constituency due to political violence during campaign
Malawi’s landlocked status places a huge burden on its economy. This makes imports and exports expensive. Because of time-consuming and poor-quality rail and road transport, the country’s transport costs are among the highest in Africa.
The search for a solution has dominated Malawi’s foreign policy since independence in 1964. Malawi relies on four main trade corridors: the ports of Dar es Salaam in Tanzania; Beira and Nacala in Mozambique and Durban in South Africa.
An alternative route is a waterway to the Indian Ocean through Mozambique. It was first proposed in 1891. The now controversial idea was revived in 2005 by Malawi’s third president, Bingu wa Mutharika (2004-2012) as a signature foreign policy project. It was known as the Shire-Zambezi Waterway.
Believing it would be an important legacy of his presidency, he consistently claimed that using the route from Nsanje in Malawi to Chinde in Mozambique would drastically reduce Malawi’s transport costs and boost economic growth.
Malawi’s main exports are tobacco, tea, sugar. It imports oils, consumer goods and fertilisers.
But Malawi has so far failed to get access to the Indian Ocean. Our research suggests this is because of two important factors: Malawi’s diplomatic strategy and the absence of Mozambique’s buy-in.
We found that for the project to happen, Malawi must change its diplomatic approach and the two countries must ensure that their national interests in the project are closely aligned.
Yet there may be renewed hope for the project. This is because there are recent signs that the two countries do in fact have interests in common and can collaborate on a project.
The Shire-Zambezi waterway
Malawi’s diplomatic relations with Mozambique have not been harmonious since independence. Historically, Malawi was aligned to apartheid South Africa, which provided support to the Renamo rebel movement during Mozambique’s 16-year civil war.
Mozambique’s leaders therefore showed little interest in Mutharika’s vision of a waterway running through its territory. The other factor was Mozambique would likely lose out on the toll or freight charges for foreign vehicles that use its transport network. Instead, in 2009 they announced plans to rehabilitate the port of Beira, rather than Chinde’s, and improve the country’s road network.
Still, Mutharika pursued the waterway project. First, beginning in 2005, he sought support from other African leaders at meetings of the African Union, Southern African Development Community (SADC) and New Partnership For Africa’s Development (NEPAD).
Second, he bolstered the credibility of the project by formally and informally including Zambia, Zimbabwe and the Democratic Republic of Congo. As a former Secretary General of the Preferential Trade Area of East and Central Africa (PTA), he believed that a regional integration component would win his project favour.
Third, Mutharika insisted that the project be completed quickly, even in the absence of Mozambican approval. He may have reasoned that if he demonstrated his commitment, Mozambique would be forced to comply for the sake of neighbourly relations.
Megaphone diplomacy
Mutharika’s strategy demonstrated the shortcomings of “megaphone diplomacy” in international relations. Megaphone diplomacy is generally understood as the use of mass media to advance contentious diplomatic aims. This is the opposite of “quiet diplomacy” through traditional diplomatic channels.
Without consulting the Mozambican government and after almost a year in power, Mutharika organised a highly publicised groundbreaking ceremony in Nsanje port in southern Malawi in October 2005. Subsequently, his administration engaged a private Portuguese company to begin phase one of the construction of the port.
This phase was quickly completed and Mutharika’s government went ahead to publicise the official opening of the waterway. Billboards went up across the country emblazoned with the words
“The dream becomes reality: Nsanje Port opens October 2010”.
The presidents of Zambia and Zimbabwe were invited to the public ceremony to celebrate the planned arrival of a barge carrying 60 tonnes of imported fertiliser. Mozambican authorities, however, impounded the barge and detained four Malawians for navigating the river without authorisation.
Mozambique objected to the project on grounds that no economic feasibility study or environmental impact assessment had been carried out. It also claimed that Malawi had not even requested official clearance of the barge.
The final blow for Malawi’s diplomatic debacle was the publication of the feasibility report commissioned by the SADC. The 2013 report concluded that the project is
“technically feasible but not financially viable.”
Although the waterway is Malawi’s shortest route to the sea, the report concluded that only 273,200 tonnes per year could be transported through the waterway. Annual dredging and removal of aquatic plants would cost 80 million US dollars per year, the report further said.
Mozambican response
The report provided a legitimate reason for Mozambique’s withdrawal from the project, but failed diplomacy undoubtedly led to the collapse of the waterway project. Mozambique was operating from a position of power as it controls access to the sea. And it was unlikely to benefit much from the Shire-Zambezi Waterway. If Malawi changes its diplomatic approach, the project may ultimately see the light of day.
Indeed, Malawi’s tactics appeared to reinforce Mozambique’s opposition to the project, which it felt undermined its national interests.
In recent months, Malawi’s current president Peter Mutharika (Bingu Mutharika’s brother) has been drumming up support for the project again. Mozambique continues to ignore such signals.
But the two countries recently signed an agreement that will allow the Electricity Supply Corporation of Malawi to purchase 200 megawatts of power from Mozambique starting in 2022. This is a clear case of a successful partnership with both countries sharing a common national interest on power generation and supply.
Despite the African Union’s talk of globalisation, regional integration and partnerships, national interest continues to rule in international diplomacy. For the Shire-Zambezi project to go ahead, Malawi and Mozambique must have a frank discussion about how they could both benefit from it.
IN WHAT seems to be a common rhetoric among politicians in the SADC region, Malawi’s Information minister Mark Bokomani has accused journalists here of failure to construct reasonable questions.
And British High Commissioner to Malawi Holy Tett has observed that the media still continue to face many challenges in the SADC region.
Mark Botomani
Officially opening a Media Freedom and Democracy Conference in Malawi yesterday, Bokomani described some questions coming from journalists as “unskillful”.
The Conference, hosted by the British High Commission in Malawi, is a follow up to the Global Press Freedom Conference held in London in July this year.
“I have interacted with a lot of journalists in Malawi, and I have had to guide them in some of the questions they ask. You really fail to understand what they are talking about when they ask certain questions. So, I have had to ask some of them to reconstruct their questions; and this is challenging to the profession,” he said as the audience laughed.
“Good journalism is a product of good journalists. And good journalists are those who are well informed; and these are the catalyst to an active citizenry. If journalists are not well informed, they cannot inspire citizens to effect positive change in society. In fact, bad journalists are an embarrassment to the profession.”
And Bokomani asked journalists who felt they had reached their limit in knowledge to leave the newsroom.
He said such journalists usually developed ego and became a bad influence on young journalists.
“Journalists who feel they have reached the ceiling of knowledge should leave the newsroom. Because they feel they know too much, they are the ones who ask unreasonable questions,” said Bokomani.
“For information to flow, a free media is key. And in order to have an active citizen, you need an active media, which is persuaded to serve and ensure accountability.”
And High Commissioner Holy Tett highlighted several challenges that needed to be tackled by media practitioners.
High Commissioner Tett said the media played a critical role as catalysts for political and social change.
“Some of the challenges you face include economic challenges; that is, you face economic sanctions from those you write about. If they are not happy with what you write they will not bring adverts to your media institution. On the other hand, technology can be both an asset and a hindrance to journalism. It can be used to shut down critical media houses,” said High Commissioner Tett.
”Because of such challenges, some journalists end up writing for the powerful instead of the people. Journalists are never real journalists if they ere agents of power. Real journalists are agents of the people.”
Meanwhile, MISA Malawi Chapter national governing council member Mandala Mambulasa lamented that threats of dictatorship were still real in the SADC region.
“Theses threats are still strong, hence the need for partnerships among journalists in the region. We also need to strengthen institutions of governance in the region,” said Mambulasa.
The British High Commissioner, Ms Holly Tett, has encouraged the media fraternity to apply for the Chevening Africa Media Freedom Fellowship, which offers a unique opportunity to explore the mechanisms through which public trust in the media can be restored, and the boundaries of media freedom.
The High Commissioner made the remarks at the opening of the regional conference on media freedom, which started in Lilongwe on Monday and brought together media representatives from Malawi, Zambia, Mozambique, Tanzania and Namibia to discuss how to defend freedom of expression and build democracy in the sub region. Ms Tett revealed that the scholarship deadline is 9 December and applications can be submitted via Chevening Africa Media Freedom Fellowship (CAMFF)
The fellowship is an eight-week residential course to be delivered by the University of Westminster, in London, from 18 May to 10 July 2020, and is designed for those involved in setting and pushing the boundaries of trust, standards and freedom in the media in 11 countries in sub-Saharan Africa including: senior journalists at public service and independent media; senior staff at media regulators; statistics agencies responsible for releasing information; and media NGOs.
The British High Commissioner, Ms Holly Tett, said:
We are looking for ambitious, professional, and innovative leaders from Malawi and ten other countries – Burundi, Cameroon, Ethiopia, Gambia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South Africa, South Sudan, Uganda, and Zimbabwe – who will study hard in the UK, and be open to immersing themselves in the opportunities that arise.
Our alumni network is full of dynamic influencers who have shared the same experience that you will. They can offer encouragement, mentorship, advice, and contacts. When you return home after your studies you should feel well-equipped to start making a real difference professionally or socially.
There is a lot to potentially gain from submitting a thoughtful application, so if you have what it takes to be a Chevening Fellow, I would encourage you to apply before the 9 December deadline.
The fellowship will be delivered by the University of Westminster’s Dr Winston Mano, a leading academic expert on communication in Africa and director of the University’s Africa Media Centre, and Peter Cunliffe-Jones, who founded Africa Check – the continent’s leading independent fact-checking organisation.
Chevening Fellowships are offered to mid-career professionals who have reached a position of influence and want to increase their knowledge, networks, and potential through tailored short courses, research, or professional placements at UK institutions.
Chevening Fellowships are awarded to individuals with demonstrable leadership experience who also have strong academic backgrounds. Since Chevening was created in 1983, over 50,000 outstanding professionals have had the opportunity to develop in the UK through its scholarship and fellowship programmes.
UDF has won 50 percent of the six presidential elections held since 1994. But in the last three elections, the party has faltered. The last elections were even more shocking; the party president – son to the founding president of the once mighty political grouping – Atupele Muluzi did not just perform poorly on the presidential front but failed to secure his own seat in Parliament. Since then, the UDF has gone quiet. In this interview with UDF spokesperson Ken Ndanga, our News Analyst Suzgo Chitete presents questions widely asked by the public.
Q
: UDF contested in the May 21 polls in all three aspects, what is your general position on the outcome which is being contested in court in part by fellow contestants?
A
: We were to a greater extent betrayed by our monitors. What is coming out in the court now clearly shows that our monitors were sleeping on the job. On the positive note, at least we were able to win in areas which we have not been winning in the last two elections such as Blantyre Malabada and one constituency in Nkhotakota. That in itself is an indication that we can do better in the next election.
Q
: Some argue that the UDF has been ruined, going by both presidential, parliamentary and local government elections results in the May 21 Tripartite Elections due to poor leadership. What’s your take?
A
Atupele Muluzi
: It is easy to blame the leadership when things have not worked. In every political party, each one has to play a role for the success of the party. Of course, we need to change the thinking which suggests that all our problems can be solved by the leader. A proper post-mortem will surely reveal that there are several factors that may have led to the unsatisfactory performance.
Q
: UDF seems to be a party that enjoys partnering with ruling parties, going by recent developments, you worked with PP [People’s Party] and lately DPP. What has been the benefit to the party to be in a working relationship with governing parties?
A
: Politics is very dynamic. We have worked with both opposition and government too. It is unfortunate that some people seem to focus so much on our working relationship with parties in power. When we work with governments we mean well for the country and we do that in good faith. We want to make Malawi a better place regardless of who is the leader. Unfortunately, partisan politics in Malawi does not work well with that kind of approach.
Q
: There is strong public perception that UDF works with governing parties to save the founder Bakili Muluzi from prosecution on the K1.7 billion case which has stalled? How do you weigh in on this assumption?
A
: Lies spread faster than truths. The truth of the matter though is that these matters are in court and our courts are independent. There is no evidence of any interference so far. Let me not comment further.
Q
: The party has always been viewed as serving the interests of the Muluzis [both senior and junior]. What is the party doing to shake off this public image?
A
: It is a fact that the party has been led by two Muluzi’s at different times. If we were to pass a resolution that after Dr. Bakili Muluzi we should not allow any other Muluzi to lead the party, what will the world say? That is not to say they will be there forever. It is not possible. The party will always give a chance to any person who has the interest of the party and that of the country at heart to lead the party through a democratic process as enshrined in the party constitution.
Q
: Having failed to secure the presidency in the last two elections, what’s the future of Atupele Muluzi?
A
: If you ask me about the future of the organisation, I will explain to you but your question in my view is very personal and it will be unfair for me to respond to that on behalf of Right Honourable Atupele Muluzi.
Q
: Do you think the UDF will ever command the massive support it ever enjoyed between 1994 and 2004?
A : What the UDF has gone through in the recent times is good for the party. Experience is a good teacher and the world is a good school, so they say. We are engaging our people. Through the interface we are able to get their views which include concerns and possible solutions. If we listen and implement what the people want then we can even become stronger than before. The UDF party will bounce back and get back into government in our life time.
