VZCZCXRO5793
OO RUEHDU RUEHJO RUEHMR
DE RUEHLG #0286 0881425
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 291425Z MAR 06
FM AMEMBASSY LILONGWE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 2566
INFO RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC

UNCLAS LILONGWE 000286 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR AF/S GABRIELLE MALLORY 
STATE FOR INR/AA 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV KDEM MI
SUBJ: MALAWI LAUNCHES CONSTITUTIONAL REVIEW 
 
¶1. (U) Summary: On March 28 President Bingu wa Mutharika 
opened Malawi's first Constitutional Review since the advent 
of multiparty democracy in 1994.  The 6-month review aims to 
conduct a comprehensive examination of constitutional 
problems that have arisen during the country's first decade 
of democracy. Over 250 delegates will take part in the 
conference, which will address issues such as the role of 
the vice-president, the separation of powers, presidential 
age limits, and local government elections.  End Summary 
 
¶2. (U) Opening the conference, Mutharika highlighted changes 
to the "floor-crossing" law and local government elections 
as two issues which he would like to see addressed.  Taking 
a pot-shot at European donors (principally Germany and 
Norway, who have pushed the hardest for the long-delayed 
local elections), Mutharika said "outsiders are dictating 
what is done with local government elections," and instead 
"we Malwians" should decide.  He also called for the 
conference delegates to address the separation of powers, 
and the mandate of the judiciary to interpret the 
constitution.  The president noted that Malawi has amended 
its constitution some 100 times since 1994, and exhorted 
delegates to propose modifications that would make amending 
the constitution a rarer occurrence. 
 
¶3. (U) Poloffs met with Justice Elton Singini, Commissioner 
of the Malawi Law Commission, on March 14 to discuss the 
review process. Singini said the impetus for a review dates 
back over two years, to when former vice-president Justin 
Malewezi resigned from his party but maintained his 
position, sparking a constitutional crisis in the waning 
months of the Muluzi administration.  The Law Commission has 
since convinced current president Bingu wa Mutharika to 
support the review, with the understanding that it will 
serve as a wider, all-encompassing process. 
 
¶4. (U) Singini singled out the recall provision, the 
hiring/firing of vice-presidents, crossing the floor in 
parliament, and presidential voting structures as some 
issues that will garner the most attention in the review 
process. 
 
¶5. (U) After the initial conference, the Law Commission will 
form a panel of experts to come up with proposed changes to 
the constitution.  They will then hold a second conference 
in August to review the proposed changes. 
 
¶6. (SBU) Following this second conference, the Law 
Commission will will present the proposals to both 
Parliament and the Cabinet.  Government must then take the 
changes to the floor of Parliament for passage.  Government 
is under no obligation to take all of the Law Commissions 
proposals, and Singini in fact expects them to discard a 
few. 
 
¶7. (U) Most changes to constitution would then have to be 
passed by a 2/3 majority in Parliament.  However, some 
sections of the constitution require a general referendum to 
change them, something that Singini said he hopes to avoid 
(primarily due to cost). 
 
¶8. (SBU) Comment: As reported previously (reftel), the 
entire review process could well be hijacked by political 
issues of the day.  Mutharika, while calling for Malawians 
to put aside "old grudges", brought up one of the most 
controversial issues (the floor-crossing provision) in his 
opening speech, drawing both boos and cheers from the crowd. 
(Note: If the floor-crossing provision is left in the 
constitution, and the courts allow Parliament to enforce it, 
Mutharika could lose up to half of his party's seats in 
Parliament.) 
 
¶9. (SBU) For his part, Singini himself seems to understand 
the challenges the commission faces in effecting real 
change.  And as one of the framers of the current 
constitution, he is in a good place to appreciate the 
pitfalls and hurdles of this review process. End Comment. 
GILMOUR