Hope for rule of law in Malawi

Saturday 25 February 2012 by Jonathan Rayner

I’d hoped that things might get better in Malawi when its diminutive, top-hat wearing, fly-whisk toting life president left the political stage in 1994. But I was wrong - in the second decade of the 21st century, the central African state still seems set on turning its back on the rule of law.

The country’s latest excesses have included sentencing two gay men to death - for being gay - and arresting and detaining a human rights lawyer who had complained to the police that some men had attacked his premises with firebombs.

More of that later. First, let’s go back to what Malawi used to be like under the nonagenarian life president. His Excellency Ngwazi doctor H. Kamuzu Banda, as he later styled himself, was born in central Africa, went to school in Scotland, trained as a medical doctor and practised as a GP in the north of England and London. He gave up all this to join the struggle for Nyasaland’s independence from the colonial yoke of British rule.

Nyasaland won its independence, becoming Malawi, and Banda - Hastings Banda, as he was then known - became its first prime minister. A couple of years later he became president, then life president, ruling the country as a one-party state from the mid-1960s until 1994.

Some of his edicts, which brooked no argument, were - frankly - bizarre.

Students at his ‘Eton of Africa’ secondary school, for example, studied Latin, Greek and Ancient History from day one - although as one of the poorest countries in the world, Malawi might have benefited more from students equipped to become engineers or doctors.

The country’s dress code was odd, too. Females from school age onwards were banned from wearing shorts or trousers, but had to wear a skirt or dress that fell to below the knees. There were no exceptions. The censors would set about foreign magazines, even Marie Claire or Woman, with a felt tip pen and draw long skirts on photos of female models showing their legs.

There was an index of banned books, as well. Black Beauty was on it, until some brave soul told someone in authority that it was actually about a girl and her black-coated pet horse. I know all this because I lived in Malawi during the mid-1980s, and loved the people and the lakes and mountains. It was, however, my first experience of living in a totalitarian state and I quickly developed the local tic of looking over my shoulder before saying anything remotely critical of the regime.

Telephones, we believed, were routinely tapped, and if you were talking indiscreetly in a public place you covered your mouth with a hand - special branch was rumoured to have trained all its officers to lip-read.

That was now more than 20 years ago and much of it was probably paranoia, so what about the brave new world of post-Banda Malawi? Sadly, not much seems to have changed. Just last week, human rights lawyer and former attorney general Ralph Kasambara was attacked, arrested and detained - and remains in detention despite having been granted bail.

According to a statement from the Commonwealth Lawyers Association (CLA), Kasambara’s offices were attacked on 13 February by a group of men armed with petrol bombs. The lawyer’s security guard overcame them and took some of them to the police station, whereupon Kasambara and five of his people were arrested. The fire bombers had accused them of kidnap and of torturing them for refusing sexual favours.

The CLA statement says that Kasambara was bailed on 14 February and released the following day, only to be rearrested an hour later. He has now been transferred to a maximum security prison, while his lawyers have received notice that they are to be questioned by the anti-corruption bureau about their role in the bail proceedings.

The CLA says that as a member of the Commonwealth, Malawi is committed to the Commonwealth’s shared ‘fundamental values’, at the core of which is adherence to democratic principles, respect for the rule of law, good governance and human rights. Malawi’s constitution also holds that its citizens are innocent until proven guilty and that their detention must be reviewed in court.

The Law Society of England & Wales has also released a statement, with president John Wotton saying: ‘The Malawian government must ensure that court rulings in Kasambara’s case are properly respected, that bail is acknowledged and that he is released as a matter of urgency. Malawi, a democracy, with a constitution and a bill of rights, must adhere to the basic legal principles.’

Democracy and the rule of law are still quite raw in Europe - there are many among us who remember Hitler, Stalin and ethnic cleansing in the Balkans. Why should Africa embrace them any quicker than we managed? Maybe they also need to go through the bloodletting and genocide first... sad, though, because I had hoped that things might have got better in Malawi, at least.

Jonathan Rayner is a reporter at the Gazette

LinkedIn logoJoin our LinkedIn Human Rights sub-group

Follow Jonathan on Twitter

Comments

So

Is anyone actually interested in this stuff? This is supposed to be a magazine for solicitors, not a forum for journalists to write 1,000 words criticising foreign regimes. Malawi is not good at justice? Is that the point? So what? The same could no doubt be said about lots of regimes - indeed, the Gazette kindly informed us earlier this that a "covert" investigation had revealed that Fiji is pretty poor at justice too. The Law Society might want to think about the deficiencies in the legal system in England and Wales before telling foreign governments how they should run their countries.

If you're not interested, why

If you're not interested, why click on the link and then post a message about it?

So - Me on Saturday 03:11

The Gazette is constantly exposing 'deficiencies in the legal system in England and Wales' - as even a cursory glance at any issue will show you.

And, yes, this type of piece is of interest to some readers, although clearly not to you. Some lawyers care that fellow lawyers are being persecuted or murdered, even if that persecution and murder is happening outside the UK. Some lawyers even try to help by writing interventions, signing petitions, joining delegations to, or sponsoring law societies in, the offending countries.

Please try and understand the distinction between reporting something - which is the job of journalists - and telling (in this instance, 'foreign governments') what to do. Malawi is a member of the Commonwealth and derives certain benefits from its membership. In turn, Malawi is expected to comply with 'Commonwealth principles', a code of behaviour that includes respecting the rule of law, not detaining people without charge and all the other good stuff that we take for granted. This article tells the government of Malawi that the eyes of the world are watching - and tells readers what the Law Society and others are trying to do about it.

Well, yes fair enough-but the

Well, yes fair enough-but the Law Society can't get a decent deal for solicitors from the SRA or lenders-so to have its official organ going on about other countries is very likely to annoy those who pay for it.

We are told constantly that we have to be more "consumer" (they used to be clients!) oriented, so presumably the same should apply to the Law Society-and solicitors are the consumer in that sphere. And its not as if we can just go to another, competitor Law Society is it? The Law Society has a monopoly in respect of solicitors, who have to pay it. So really a little more circumspection would be appropriate in difficult times-or certainly it would be, shall we say, "diplomatic".

Uzbekistan - Land of Kangaroo Courts

Well, I actually think it is refreshing to have articles like this. It does make a change from hearing about the deficiencies in our system and perhaps puts them into perspective.

It is interesting and yet disturbing to read about the state interference in the legal systems in many countries. One of the worst examples I have heard of is in Uzbekistan. They trump up charges against people who run foreign businesses. They run businesses out of the country and steal their assets and the judiciary is a controlled by a brutal dictator. I bet there are many lawyers in that country serving time in prisons.

Uzbekistan are allowed to get away with their appalling human rights record because the US use it as a base for its Afgan operations.

Have a read and sign the online petition to free this person falsely convcted of 'espionage' in one of their notorious military courts.

http://freesaidashurov.com/

Some more coverage and background to this.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/uzbekistan/8695231/Uzbekistan-jails-former-metallurgist-at-British-mining-company-for-spying.html

I would be interested if anyone has any views or experience in this part of the world.

Noble sentiments

Noble words, Mr Rayner - but you seem to be assuming that the government of Malawi reads your blogs in the Gazette or cares about press releases in which the Law Society tells it what it "must" do. The Society can't even wangle an invitation to a summit on whiplash claims, so its assumption that it might have some influence over the government of Malawi seems both naive and high-handed.

I am sure that all solicitors (including me) are keen to see an end to human rights abuses, wherever they occur. However, if I want to read about those abuses and how I can help to stop them happening, I will look at Amnesty International's website, where the topic receives much more detailed coverage: see, for example, http://www.amnesty.org/en/region/malawi.

As "Anon" has pointed out above, the Society only exists because solicitors are required to pay for it. Quite what they are getting for their money is becoming increasingly unclear: one has only to read the postings on this website to see the level of dissatisfaction which practitioners are now feeling towards the Society. Having ceded its regulatory function to the SRA, the Society appears woefully inadequate as a body aimed at representing solicitors and protecting and advancing their interests. Now that the Society has told Malawi what it must do, perhaps it can give some attention to that domestic issue.

Good debate going on here,

Good debate going on here, with Kelly Matthews on one side and 'Me' and (the ubiquitous) 'Anon' on the other.

For what it's worth, and this is something my colleagues and I have said numerous times before, you do not pay for the Gazette. It is a profit-making enterprise, the profit being derived from advertising revenues - even in these dire economic times.

Again for what it's worth, your PC fee mostly goes to the SRA, not the Law Society.

Anon - we try to publish a variety of stories to suit all tastes, some of which can involve exposing abuses by certain overseas regimes. The great bulk of our stories are domestic, however, and are more likely to report developments than try to act as a propaganda tool.

Me - You are right: the Malawi government probably doesn't look forward to the sound of The Gazette dropping on to its doormat every week, more's the pity. But the high commission is likely to have web alerts and a press cutting service for when Malawi is mentioned in the press. The country relies upon 'mature democracies' like the UK for aid and so needs to be aware of how it is viewed internationally - and, one hopes, take steps accordingly.

Thanks for the comments.

Jonathan Rayner