For a nation that must contend with the considerable structural socio-economic challenges that it does, Malawi punches well above its weight as a mature democracy. The Southern African nation has experienced five major peaceful electoral or constitutional turnovers of power at the presidential level, where an incumbent president or ruling party was defeated or replaced by the opposition. At the heart of this notable accomplishment has been a legislature that has been relatively responsive, well-intentioned and has played an important role in the country’s public life.
Comparatively in the African context, the Malawi Parliament has a rich legacy of interfacing with external audiences mostly through platforms like public hearings, inquiries and ad-hoc committees. The most recent public inquiry, the Chikangawa Plane Crash Inquiry, conducted by a special parliamentary ad-hoc committee investigating the tragic aircraft accident in Chikangawa Forest that claimed the lives of former Vice President Saulos Chilima and eight others, responded to public demand and was televised live. The Public Accounts Committee also recently championed the Amaryllis Hotel Acquisition Inquiry which scrutinized the controversial acquisition of the Amaryllis Hotel by public service pension fund schemes. State-owned enterprises like the Blantyre Water Board, Lilongwe Water Board and the Malawi Investment and Trade Centre have also recently been the subject of audit hearings to to address financial irregularities flagged in Auditor General reports in addition to National Budget Cluster Public Hearings.
There are, however, mixed views about whether these hearings are worthwhile and if their recommendations are ever implemented. There is a view that recommendations from prominent public hearings and inquiries held by the Parliament of Malawi are sometimes implemented, but their translation into policy or legal action varies widely due to political and systemic constraints. While the portfolio committees successfully use the public hearings and inquiries to compel accountability, shape national budget allocations, or expose mismanagement, formal implementation depends largely on executive buy-in and follow-through by government ministries. It is these shortcomings that need to be addressed to consolidate the legislature’s oversight work.
Greater Enforcement Authority & Financial Independence
The Public Accounts Committee is on record for complaining about unimplemented recommendations and has consistently called for greater enforcement authority and financial independence to improve their accountability to citizens. The call for greater financial independence is not isolated, as it is a common grievance across Southern Africa as legislatures depend on financial disbursements from the same executive branch over whom they are expected to exercise oversight. This is further exacerbated by the political culture in which political parties tend to deploy their most talented and senior leaders to the executive branch and this makes it difficult for junior backbenchers in the legislature to hold their political superiors to account.
The only notable implementation successes have been in instances like Parliamentary cluster hearings and pre-budget consultations which regularly lead to revisions in ministerial allocations and adjustments based on stakeholder and public feedback. Sometimes inquiries by entities like the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) or the Committee on Commissions, Statutory Corporations and State Enterprises frequently result in forced structural reviews, recovery of public funds, or administrative changes within parastatals and state-owned enterprises.
However, on a general scale, many portfolio committee recommendations and resolutions are advisory in nature or require the executive branch to table a formal action plan or introduce a bill for enforcement. To further compound issues, there tend to be delays or resistance from relevant Ministries, Departments, and Agencies (MDAs) that often stall the tangible execution of corrective measures identified during hearings. There is need for legislative and policy interventions that significantly reduce the legislature’s financial and policy dependence on the executive. A political cultural change is also required in which political parties also start to deploy some of their star performers and senior leadership to the legislature so as to strengthen its oversight gravitas.
Enhanced automation and Digitisation
AFIDEP’s Africa Development Indicators (AII) and other governance indexes laud the Parliament of Malawi for its use of Parliament Television, particularly its live broadcasts for improving access to Parliamentary proceedings. This is also enhanced by the use of social media to facilitate citizen engagement in legislative proceedings. Nevertheless, there is no dedicated online archive for legislative documents, delayed availability of Hansards, weak digital systems for citizens seeking access to legislative information and limited proactive publication of Parliamentary information.
There is need for greater automation and digitization which needs to start with the very enhancement and modernization of the website of the Parliament of Malawi. The legislature needs to implement an open data policy and develop a comprehensive digital archive for Parliamentary documents including even digital versions of the Hansard. This will greatly make it easier to exercise oversight when there is more legislative information in the public domain.
Partnership with Civil Society
Malawi ranks low on global human development scales. It sits around 170th to 174th out of nearly 193 countries on the Human Development Index (HDI) and resultantly, is highly dependent on external Official Development Assistance (ODA) and civil society support. The Parliament of Malawi is no exception and has been the recipient of various pockets of capacity building support to vitalize its committees, research functions, gender balance, openness and accountability to the citizenry from development partners and civil society. The silver lining of this situation is that Malawi’s legislative culture has become steeped in collaboration and mutual learning from a vast array of partners.
Development partners and civil society need to do more to support the openness of the Parliament of Malawi. Low hanging fruit in this regard would be to support automation and digitization programmes that will put more legislative information into the public domain and facilitate broader access to legislative information for citizens. Because Malawi does not yet have a dedicated, coherent Parliamentary monitoring program, civil society needs to organise itself and collaborate on assessing the extent to which various legislative organs are delivering on their representative, lawmaking and oversight obligations. More can also be done to promote the use of local languages to improve accessibility as well as strengthening Members of Parliament’s accountability by encouraging regular reporting back to constituents on promises made and achievements delivered. The legislature itself, through its presiding officers, is on record for calling for greater partnership with civil society in exercising oversight over the executive as they cannot do it alone.
Mziwandile Ndlovu, Ph.D. is a Research & Policy Analyst with the African Institute for Development Policy (AFIDEP).
Disclaimer: The views, opinions and statements expressed in this article are those of the Author and do not necessarily reflect the views or position of PMG. PMG does not endorse or necessarily agree with any of the opinions or conclusions expressed and has not independently verified all information contained herein. PMG accepts no responsibility or liability for the accuracy, completeness or content of the article, or for any reliance placed on the views or information expressed therein.