By Focus Maganga
As the 2025 general elections approach, a contentious debate surrounds the law requiring the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) to rely on national registration identity card issued by National Registration Bureau (NRB) as the sole proof of eligibility to register.
Section 12 of the Presidential, Parliamentary, and Local Government Elections Act (PPLEA) of 2023 states “a person who is eligible to be registered in an election shall, as proof of eligibility, present in person to a registration officer, proof of his or her national registration issued by the National Registration Bureau”.
This provision departs from the previous law which allowed Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) to open registration centers for not less than 14 days, and register everyone who is eligible to vote.
Further, the provision calls upon every citizen to ensure that they have registered for the national ID if they are to be registered to vote.
Proponents of this provision argue NRB’s national IDs enhance the credibility and transparency of the electoral process, due to their technical sophistication. Critics argue that relying solely on national IDs may disenfranchise thousands of eligible voters who have not been able to obtain or renew their IDs due to some challenges. This article will weigh in on the call to critically examine the provision.
It is imperative towards the beginning to acknowledge the spirit of the provision is based on the assumption that the process of issuance of IDs will not be faced by technical and administrative hiccups such as malfunctioning equipment, inadequate fuel for generators and insufficient registration forms.
However, there is evidence the issuance of national IDs at NRB is infested with many hitches.
The argument about credibility of national IDs and the technical capacity NIB in processing the same no longer carries any aorta of value given the presence of those hitches.
Downs (1972), in their work, ‘issue-attention cycle’, contended when looking at a policy and what it is meant to address, one has got to, among others, consider the size of the population affected by the problem and the intrinsic qualities of the issue.
In the context of the national IDs, it is reported thousands in some parts of the country have failed to obtain or renew national IDs. And that implies, if MEC is to solely rely on national IDs as means of identifying eligibility of voters, as per the current electoral law, the Commission will leave out some Malawians who equally have a right to choose political leaders and representatives.
More so, in the words of the former MEC Chairperson as quoted on NRB website: “One critical element in holding a credible election is the accuracy and completeness of the voters’ register. 2019 and 2020 elections we had the best voter register ever because we successfully migrated to a biometric voter registration system. The biometrics of all voters were captured by the NRB. This accomplishment was largely attributed to the seamless coordination and collaboration between MEC and NRB, guided by the first MOU signed in 2017.”
What that means is that should MEC exclusively rely on NRB’s IDs, when others continue to fail to access the same, MEC will be presiding over an uncredible elections. Accuracy and completeness of the voters’ register is the foundation of a credible election, and such cannot be said to manifest when others fail to get the ID.
Further, the right to vote for an eligible voter is something that should never be compromised. This position was contended by the Supreme court of Malawi in their ruling of the 2019 presidential appeal case.
The learned justices argued: “Elections define the roadmap and lifeline of a society, in that the elected few become responsible for the welfare and the wellbeing of the rest of the society. We should therefore avoid, at any cost and on any account, ushering leadership into office through an electoral process that is flawed because the chances are that such a process will not reflect the will of the people.”
Additionally, the Malawi Constitution (section 40 [3]) accords every Malawi the right to vote and to stand for election for public office. If Malawians who failed to process national ID, largely because of structural issues at NRB, the 2025 elections will be, regardless of the outcomes of the elections, unfair, uncredible and unacceptable. Further, people’s right to vote will not have been respected.
The Inter-Parliamentary Union on the declaration on criteria for free and fair elections emphasized the need for no eligible citizen to be denied the right to vote or disqualified from registration as voter.
No wonder, in the previous elections, including the 2020 presidential elections, the outcome of the presidential election was accepted even though MEC did not solely rely on national IDs though the Commission worked with NRB in the registration process.
More so, even NRB rely on other sources of evidence when identifying Malawians.
In light of undeniable reports of hiccups faced by NRB to issue national IDs, it is important that people’s right to vote should not be compromised. Elected officials have obligation to sustain trust and legitimacy to govern. In a democracy such as ours, a credible election which, among others, entail all who are eligible to vote and who want to exercise that right have not been denied a voice to put a government of their choice.
In conclusion, it is the considered view of this article that reports of hiccups in the issuance of national IDs poses a huge threat to credibility of 2025 presidential, parliamentary and local elections given that the national IDs are the only source of verification MEC will use to register, as per the current law.
This issue requires to be given what Hilgartner and Bosk (1988:54-58) would call “celebrity status”. Clearly, the results of the elections will not be accepted given the reports of administrative and technological hiccups at NRB which may limit the Bureau’s capacity to help facilitate a credible voters’ register.
Changing this law does not disadvantage any interested parties in the forthcoming general elections. If anything, it is the current law that primarily disadvantages Malawians because it may deny some people a right to vote. There is a constitutional obligation duty bearers have to religiously protect the right to vote, and the cited electoral provision fails to do that and must be changed. Up to such a time, every Malawian has a National ID, the law must allow MEC to include other sources of identification for Malawians.
0 Comments