They walked out of Parliament Friday, for the last time until Malawi goes to the polls, with the tag of history makers on them for serving six years instead of the prescribed five. But how will that history judge the performance of these members of Parliament?
By Cathy Maulidi:
As members of Parliament (MPs) filed out of the chamber and the National Assembly premises Friday and as the gates behind them slammed shut, it was the last time some of them will be in that place again.
The lawmakers will not reconvene until after the national vote in September where some of them, if not many, will lose — if they contest at all.
They walked out holding the distinction of serving an unprecedented six-year term, a deviation from the standard five-year cycle.
This extension was a direct consequence of the 2020 Constitutional Court ruling that nullified the 2019 Presidential election results.
The subsequent revote necessitated a realignment of the presidential and parliamentary terms, culminating in the MPs’ tenure being extended to coincide with the 2025 Presidential elections.
But how will history judge them?
Mixed rating
As the parliamentary session concluded, a critical assessment of the six-year term has brought a mixed rating, with public discourse focusing on whether this extended period in office translated into tangible benefits for the Malawian populace or represented a period of stagnation.
For the average Malawian on the street, this felt as yet another pointless time.
Noel Msiska from Lilongwe said the MPs had once again prioritised their own interests over the struggles of Malawians.
“The excessive absenteeism of MPs this term clearly demonstrates their self-interest,” Msika said.
Another Lilongwe resident, Janet Malamula, echoed this disappointment.
She said the MPs failed to address the issues most affecting their lives.
“Since 2019, our lives have worsened, and they haven’t focused on the economic issues that directly impact us,” she said.
Through a question we put forward to Malawians through our Facebook page, Times360, many Malawians expressed dissatisfaction with the way the lawmakers have performed in Parliament and in their constituencies.
Some also blamed the opposition for being one of the weakest in history.
Legislative output
Regarding business in the House, a key aspect of the Parliament’s work has been its legislative output.
Over the past six years, the MPs have deliberated and passed a number of bills.
Notably, in 2022, Parliament repealed the controversial sedition offences through the Protected Flag, Emblems and Names (Amendment) Bill and the Penal Code (Amendment) Bill.
These legislative changes dismantled Section 4 of the Protected Flag, Emblems and Names Act of 1967 and Sections 50 and 51 of the Penal Code which had been used to suppress freedom of expression by criminalising acts or speech deemed disrespectful to the President or the government.
President Lazarus Chakwera assented to these bills in 2023.
In 2023, Parliament also passed the Disaster Bill, which established the National Disaster Risk Management Committee.
This committee is mandated to spearhead the development and implementation of disaster risk management strategies and to advise the President on the declaration of a state of disaster.
Other key legislative achievements include the long-delayed passage of the Sugarcane Bill, the Mental Health Bill and the Presidential, Parliamentary and Local Government Bill, which formally extended the current MPs’ term to six years to align with the presidential election cycle.
House of controversy
However, this parliamentary term was not without controversy.
Several bills faced significant public opposition, most notably the Labour Relations Amendment Bill.
This legislation granted employers the right to deduct wages from striking employees, a move widely criticised as an infringement on workers’ rights, particularly within the public sector.
Despite strong disapproval from the opposition benches and various segments of society, both the Labour Relations (Amendment) Bill and the Employment (Amendment) Bill, containing the contentious strike provision, were passed into law.
Still on bills, efforts to introduce an age limit bill for presidential candidates, proposing a cap of 65 years, failed to gain traction in Parliament despite repeated attempts by various groups throughout the six-year period.
The leadership dynamics within Parliament also drew attention. While the Leader of Government Business remained consistent, the opposition side experienced significant instability in its leadership.
When opposition failed
For Willy Kambwandira, Executive Director for Centre for Social Accountability and Transparency, the performance of this cohort has been generally wanting.
“It will go down as a cohort that failed to live up to the expectations of Malawians.
“It is a Parliament that lacked focus on public welfare and whose debate focused on scoring more on political points. To add to that, the opposition did not help matters,” he said.
During the six years, it was obvious that the government effectively capitalised on the opposition’s internal divisions to advance its legislative agenda.
This perceived weakness of the opposition is also cited as a contributing factor to the lack of conclusive outcomes from several high-profile parliamentary inquiries.
In 2023, the Public Accounts Committee, led by Chairperson Mark Botomani, announced an investigation into the East Bridge fertiliser deal.
However, this inquiry was halted, with Botomani stating that no financial transactions were found.
This followed the premature collapse of two other significant inquiries: One into missing maize trucks at the National Food Reserve Agency (NFRA) and another into the alleged theft of K750 million from the Affordable Input Program (AIP).
Co-chairperson of the joint committee overseeing the NFRA and AIP inquiries Sameer Suleman, described their demise as a “political death”.
He cited irreconcilable political disagreements within the committee.
To date, Malawians have received no conclusive findings from these two inquiries.
But Leader of Opposition George Chaponda refuted claims that the opposition’s internal issues hampered their parliamentary contributions.
He pushed the blame on Speaker of Parliament Catherine Gotani Hara for failure to rule independently, saying she continued to frustrate the opposition.
“I would propose that going forward let’s have a neutral Speakership,” Chaponda said.
Inspiring hope for return
Leader of the House Richard Chimwendo Banda offered a contrasting view, saying the Speaker did a good job.
Chimwendo further commended MPs for doing well. He said he believed many will return to the House come September 16, 2025.
“We should pat ourselves on the back. We have done a very good job. And it is my hope that we shall all return to this House,” he said.
Closing the deliberations, Speaker Catherine Gotani Hara who has served as first female Speaker of Parliament in Malawi said under her leadership, Parliament has achieved a lot.
Perhaps noting that some MPs are nervous whether they will come back, Hara closed with a statement of assurance to them, quoting American poet, Walt Whitman.
“Keep your face always towards the sunshine and shadows will follow behind you,” she said.
The tenure of members of Parliament officially expires on July 23.
0 Comments