The history of Malawian politics is filled with distrust of dissent. As is the case with the majority of African nations, an autocratic system of government was instituted by the European colonial powers. To call for freedom from repression was to be deemed a traitor.
Hastings Banda, who ruled Malawi from its inception as an independent nation-state until 1994, continued the totalitarian method of governance he inherited from his colonial predecessors. When his ministers challenged his attempts to legalize his autocratic methods internally and his willingness to ally with white apartheid regimes in southern Africa immediately after independence, they were sacked. Several were killed. In the 1980s, several ministers were "accidentalised," a euphemism for a person murdered and then posed to make it look like an accident, when they challenged Banda's potential choice for succession, John Tembo.
The democratic period has not been able to shake this distrust of dissent. President Bakili Muluzi, who ruled from 1994-2004, was never shy of branding his opponents as threats to the nation. the result was that the three major political parties of the era shifted alliances with one another for the sake of convince like a game of musical chairs. Issues took a backseat to personalities and political ploys.
In 2004, Muluzi chose his successor in the person of Bingu wa Mutharika. The two disagreed on policy. There was to be no negotiation. Instead, Mutharika left Muluzi's UDF and began a new party, the DPP. Muluzi has since been charge with corruption dating back to his presidency. After the change of parties, Mutharika's vice president, Cassim Chilumpha, who was a member of the UDF, was charged with treason.
The bottom line is that Malawi's political leaders will continue to be unable to lead Malawians towards the future they deserve until they are able to argue of policy disagreements without questioning each other's patriotism.
(The HQT-IE)
No comments:
Post a Comment