THE ruling by the Constitutional Court of Malawi, which
ordered fresh Presidential polls in 150 days after establishing large-scale
vote manipulation, cannot be likened to the Zimbabwean scenario as the local
opposition failed to provide clear evidence of rigging, analysts have said.
The Malawi Congress Party (MCP) and the United
Transformation Movement (UTM) had petitioned the Malawi Electoral Commission
(MEC) for declaring the incumbent President Peter Arthur Mutharika of the
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), as the winner with 38,57 percent of the
vote.
MCP leader Mr Lazarus Chakwera garnered 35,41 percent while
former Vice President Saulos Chilima of UTM got 20,24 percent of the votes.
Human rights lawyer Mr David Tinashe Hofisi said the
Zimbabwe court case was not similar to the Malawian one, which is subject to
appeal whereas the Harare case was final.
Further, the Malawi appeal was an eight months full trial
whereas Zimbabwe’s process ran for 14 days.
Harare lawyer Mr Obert Gutu said the court verdict in
Malawi proved that a well packaged and presented election petition has chances
of success.
“The law is precise and common sensical. The law doesn’t
operate on vapid and rabid politically-charged bold allegations of rigging and
any other form of electoral malfeasances,” he said.
Mr Gutu said in Malawi, the petitioners were able to
demonstrate that figures had been altered using Tippex, among other
irregularities.
“On the other hand, the petitioner MDC-Alliance leader
Nelson Chamisa in the Zimbabwe Presidential election petition of 2018, dismally
and horribly failed to present any compelling evidence of vote manipulation.
The petitioner even called a Press conference at a Harare hotel and boastfully
showed what he claimed to be V11 forms that would prove that he had 2,6 million
votes in his favour.
“However, that turned out to be an insipid blue lie because
the so-called V11 forms were actually not physically there to confirm, by way
of a simple arithmetical process, that, indeed, he had 2,6 million votes in his
favour,” he said.
The MDC-A also failed to request a vote recount within the
time frame allowed by the Electoral Act. Mr Gutu urged Malawians to remain calm
ahead of the Presidential rerun.
Constitutional lawyer Professor Lovemore Madhuku also said
the decision by the Constitutional Court of Malawi was not final and could be
challenged because in Malawi, the High Court is the Constitutional Court while
the highest court is the Supreme Court of Appeal.
“Any of the parties aggrieved by the judgment may appeal to
the Supreme Court of Appeal. If that happens, we will have to wait for the
final decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal. The judgment may become final if
no appeal is lodged.”
Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) lawyer Mr Tawanda
Kanengoni, who put an impressive argument at the Constitutional Court against
the allegations made by Mr Chamisa, said he was not following the events in
Malawi closely and will comment on the judgment once he has familiarised with
the case.
Prior to the handing down of the judgment, President
Mnangagwa, who is Chair of the SADC Organ on Politics, Defence and Security
Cooperation, urged all stakeholders in Malawi to respect the outcome of the
ruling.
The Malawi concourt took about 10 hours to hand down the
judgment.
The 500-page ruling cited the widespread use of
unauthorised correctional fluid, Tippex, to alter figures; the use of duplicate
result sheets and unsigned results forms, as cases that compromised the outcome
of the elections.
Malawian Ambassador to Zimbabwe Annie Kumwenda said the
outcome of the challenge was testimony to the independence of the judiciary in
her country.
“The outcome is a sign of a democratic growth and
independence of our judiciary system. We are appealing to Malawians to embrace
peace, unity and love during the campaigning period for the presidential
election rerun.
“We are calling for high level of discipline during the
process. We may differ on our political allegiance, but we remain Malawians. We
need to safeguard the interest of future generations to come. We need to
campaign with freedom of association,” said Ambassador Kumwenda.
Former Ghanaian President Jerry Rawlings commended the
Malawian judiciary. Mr Rawlings claimed that about US$20 million was offered to
the judges “but they refused and decided to uphold the rule of law”.
0 comments:
Post a Comment