A recent report by the World Economics Business Insider Africa (WE BIA) sent shockwaves through Malawi. The report ranked Malawi as the seventh-best governed nation in Africa, with Mauritius taking the top spot. This seemingly positive news, however, has been met with widespread skepticism from Malawian citizens and commentators.
Defining Good Governance
The report defines good governance through a human rights lens. It emphasizes factors like transparent public institutions managing resources effectively, conducting public affairs openly, and upholding human rights. The report suggests that the current Malawian government, led by the Tonse Alliance, has demonstrated these qualities in its four years in power.
A Disconnect Between Report and Reality
While commentator Moses Mkandawire acknowledges some positive developments, his call for the government to maintain its anti-corruption efforts hints at underlying concerns. Many Malawians remain unconvinced by the report’s rosy portrayal. The report highlights the government’s commitment to openness. However, many question the legitimacy of the WE BIA itself. The organization’s lack of recognition and potential for bias raise suspicions about the report’s objectivity. Critics suspect it might be a government-sponsored attempt to deflect criticism.
Firstly, this report proposes that the Tonse Alliance Government has demonstrated good governance for the past four years. In other words, the report suggests that, from a human rights perspective, public institutions are conducting public affairs, managing public resources, and guaranteeing the realisation of human rights. The report further proposes that the Tonse Alliance Government exhibits the following characteristics of good governance: participation, rule of law, transparency, responsiveness, consensus orientation, equity and inclusiveness, effectiveness and efficiency, and accountability.
Secondly, the report informs the citizens of this country that the Malawi Government has adopted a participatory approach, which is helping to secure the ownership and commitment of the communities involved. Active participation by local citizens and other stakeholders aims to enhance both the quality and relevance of the suggested interventions. The planned interventions are being implemented.
Thirdly, the report submits that there is the rule of law in Malawi. All citizens and institutions within Malawi, or community, are accountable to the same laws, including lawmakers and leaders. “No one is above the law.” There is constitutionalism as well as Rechtsstaat. It refers to a political situation, not to any specific legal rule. We have “the mechanism, process, institution, practice, or norm that supports the equality of all citizens before the law, securing a non-arbitrary form of government, and more generally preventing the arbitrary use of power.”
Fourthly, the report recommends that Chakwera’s administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in government. We are working together to ensure the public trust and establish a system of transparency, public participation, and collaboration. Openness is strengthening our democracy and promoting efficiency and effectiveness in government. The government is transparent. Transparency promotes accountability and provides information for citizens about what our Government is doing. Information maintained by the Central Government is a national asset. The MCP administration is taking appropriate action, consistent with law and policy, to disclose information rapidly in forms that the public can readily find and use. Executive departments and agencies are harnessing new technologies, putting information about their operations and decisions online and readily available to the public. Executive departments and agencies are also soliciting public feedback to identify information of greatest use to the public.
Fifthly, the report advises the people of Malawi that the MCP government is a Consensus Government. Shortly after the election, all Members meet as a Caucus to set priorities for Parliament. The National Assembly remains active throughout Parliament sessions as the house of records where all Members of Parliament meet as lawmakers.
The opposition is responsible, through questioning in the House and the work of standing committees, for holding the government accountable and responsive to the people of Malawi.
Compared to the party system, there is much more communication between the opposition and government. All bills, major policies, and proposed budgets pass through committees before coming to the House. This gives Members a chance to make changes and put their “fingerprints” on initiatives before they’re made public, unlike in other systems.
Sixthly, the report exhorts public values in a democratic Malawi. The report implies that the government workforce reflects society and where all socioeconomic and other personal characteristics are represented ensuring that the needs, aspirations, and experiences of a wide range of citizens are reflected in decision-making and that barriers and gaps in service delivery are better understood.
Seventhly, the report hints that the MCP Government is effective and has a competent civil service; effectively implements government decisions; is flexible, learning, and innovative within the political leadership; the prevalence of red tape; the degree to which bureaucratic delays hinder business activity; political leadership sets and maintains strategic priorities, and the government effectively implements reforms; hiring and promotion within the government are based on merit and performance, and ethical standards prevail.
Finally, the report tips the citizens of Malawi that the MCP Government is accountable. Public officials, elected and unelected, have an obligation to explain their decisions and actions to the citizens. The government, using a variety of mechanisms—political, legal, and administrative—is designed to prevent corruption and ensure that public officials remain answerable and accessible to the people they serve. Corruption is reducing and coming to an end. Unfortunately, all the above is not true.
My take
I am not satisfied with the report which claims Malawi is highly rated in Africa as one of the best governed countries without proper data because nothing shows on the ground. As far as I’m concerned, corruption remains a major concern in Malawi, hindering progress and eroding public trust. Citizens continue to experience bribery and a lack of transparency in government dealings. There is high corruption in government, a lack of transparency, tribalism, inefficiency, and compromise to standards of infrastructure construction. Just recently, a journalists in Malawi, Macmillan Mhone, was arrested over a story published by Malawi24 reporting on allegations of corruption linked to business tycoon, Abdul Karim Batatawala. Malawians face bureaucratic hurdles and delays in accessing essential services like healthcare and education. This inefficiency frustrates citizens and hinders progress.
I also suspect that the organisation which has released this suspicious unconvincing report has somehow been paid or funded to produce such a report because it doesn’t hold any true reflection on the ground. Obviously, the Tonse government is highly condemned for its numerous shortfalls, including failing to implement many important programmes such as the agricultural input programme. Cheap fertilisers intended for poor farmers are never delivered. It is also this very same government which has stolen money from the poor farmers whereby they charged MWK 30,000 per bag as an advance payment before they could even deliver the same up to the end of the farming season. Isn’t this pure broad daylight theft? The report reminds me of dubious organisations which mushroomed in the country at one point, such as the Bridging Foundation. I do not see the originality in the report itself.
When I have tried to reach the main source of the report in question, it surprises me that it looks very sketchy, brief, and in summary form without detail. I strongly feel and believe that this could be just a face saver by government as the report tries to shift the attention from the pastoral letter by the Catholic Bishops as well as the opinion poll by Afrobarometer. The report’s lack of detail and shallow analysis raise further concerns. Therefore, the report emerges as an attempt to deflect attention from recent criticisms by the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of Malawi and negative findings from Afrobarometer opinion polls. Citizens must look beyond such reports and engage with realities on the ground. Only through independent analysis and holding the government accountable can true progress towards good governance be achieved.
While acknowledging some positive strides, it’s clear that significant challenges remain. Malawians deserve a government that prioritizes transparency, tackles corruption, and delivers on its promises. Only through continued public pressure and critical engagement can Malawi move towards a future characterised by true good governance.
