Can a truly Multi-level government structure enhance development in Malawi?

Greenwell Matchaya, PhD

As a point of departure, it is important to state in advance that this article is not meant to support or renounce any forms of state organizational structures as supported by various sections of our society in Malawi. Rather, the main purpose of this article is to take forward the debate about state organization by discussing how different parts of the government may share power in a manner that can propel development aspirations of a nation. Inevitably, it may touch on some issues related to the elements of law to elaborate on a number of issues. Again, as a consequence of such a proposal of course, I may be implicitly calling for a constitutional reform of a material nature to provide the necessary law that would anchor such a new state structure.

I must also put a disclaimer here as follows: The ideas written below should be taken simply as ideas and no one is forced to embrace or shun them. They should also not be interpreted as a drive towards any goals that I don’t know about, and hence consequently, my expectation is that whether we agree or disagree with the views herein, we can show the same through intellectual debates- and not through any dishonourable means. My belief is that this is about time we mobilized our ideas as a collective to craft that state which would deliver the common good given the present circumstances. This has to be done in areas of economics, law, political science, engineering, medicine etc. You don’t get that by seating on ideas- rather we may, by articulating and subjecting ideas to intellectual critique and appreciation! The restructuring also needs not necessarily have to be a job for the current government-remember, this is just an IDEA and do not personalize it!

That the manner in which governments are organized, and power shared, between parts of the government is a critical component for local and national development, cannot be over-emphasized. A disorganized government is often associated with costly inefficiencies, low zeal to tackle urgent issues and low accountability among other downsides.  It is hence important to have a better organized government in order to effectively advance the goals of economic development and social liberties.  By this, I do not mean that our economic (mis)fortunes can be solely explained by what structural form our government systems take (for it is well known that many other factors interact to bring what we see), but it would be naïve to disregard government structure as among the factors that can cap economic development.

Although governments may be organized in various ways, for purposes of the present submission we may differentiate between unitary and cooperative forms of state organization. Malawi has a unitary government where power is by design concentrated enormously at the higher levels and the lower levels only have limited powers for deciding or planning their own development. It is important to also note that, this form of government is not a cause of anyone in or outside government today, nor is it unique to Malawi, rather, unitary governments are rampant and in some cases they can be effective in supporting development. At present though, it would appear that such a form of government for Malawi deters development as may be discerned below.

A multi-level government (which I will call a cooperative government, hereinafter for this purpose), on the other hand maybe organized such that we have several spheres of government at various levels working in coordination and cooperation and power is not outright concentrated in one sphere of government. Examples of this include Germany, South Africa, the United States and to some extent Great Britain, among others. To achieve this, we can, and ought to take a deliberate effort as a nation to re-write the constitution such that is establishes two further spheres of government in a meaningful way, namely, the provincial spheres and the local spheres, so that in total we may have the national sphere, the provincial sphere and the local sphere.  Currently, any structures that appear to speak of the same idea unfortunately relate to the national sphere in a hierarchical manner implying that the lower structures parrot the rhythm of the national sphere all the time without much contextualization. This would have to change by law. The number of provinces for example may have to be more than the three regions that we already know whereas all the districts in each province would constitute parts of the local government.

Because often when change is proposed people resist and speculate a lot of things, below I have tried to answer some hypothetical issues that people may raise in support or rejection of a firm cooperative state organization.

Will the National sphere lose its Legislative authority?  

NO! Notice that a cooperative government could be designed such that it adds a second level of checks and balances on government branches, on top of the usual separation of powers (SOP) of government into the Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary.  The legislative authority of the national sphere of the Malawi government would still vest in the National Parliament and derived from the revised constitution- it wouldn’t be reduced by the incidence of provinces. The national parliament may need to be at least bicameral to provide enough checks and balances to one another and to provide for the heterogeneity in the electorate that now exists in Malawi.  For example the parliament would need to comprise of the current National Assembly and then a Council of Provinces as a second house (Just as in modern day South Africa). The provinces would need to have their own legislatures comprising of elected representatives, and so too would, the municipal councils. While they would be influential in enacting their local laws, the national legislature would always have the power to overwrite any strange laws that provinces may come up with, in the interesting of maintaining unity, security and order in the nation.

Will the President lose executive authority (power?)

No! The executive authority of the national sphere would still be vested in the President and his Cabinet as is the case, whereas that of the Provincial and local spheres would be vested in the provincial Executive council and the municipal councils respectively, all provided for by the revised constitution.  The president would still be the person to appoint and dismiss ministers and he can still chose any number unless an Act of parliament says otherwise. All of the spheres of course would need to have their judicial authorities vested in the courts. The Executive authorities of the provinces and local municipalities will be influential to the extent that they are exercised within the bounds of the provinces. The President and his cabinet will still be the ones with more authority and so there is no worry that the president will lose too much power. The president and his national executive will find it easier to point at achievements even at grassroots levels. The provinces will gain by being able to take charge of local matters in their provinces and municipalities. This is also an effective way of dividing labour.

Is it worth it?

At this point one would wonder whether this wouldn’t simply impose tremendous pressure on the already meagre resources as these structures would need funding. That is a good point, but one should note that government always has money and the more structures a government creates the more they will find ways of effectively using the money. Such a nature of state organization would enhance checks and balances and reduce state resources abuse thereby freeing up more for development. We should resist short-termism.

Will the provinces win or lose?

A cooperative government as can be crafted in Malawi obviously will not mean a creation of independent states within the currently territorial bounds of Malawi. Moreover cooperative government cannot be taken as a step towards secession as the prime control of the defence of the country will still be under national control and there will be no basis for revolt. There will also not be losers and winners, but Malawi could win by advancing development and its democracy.

Will other provinces run away with taxes?

No! In practice, the constitution would need to be revised such that the spheres of government are interdependent, interrelated and of course distinct. The implication of this is that we would expect that the national and provincial spheres would have areas where they may exercise complete/exclusive control themselves, for example road traffic rules, fines etc ( for provinces), and defence, mining, etc for the national spheres. Some areas which are both local and national in nature eg taxation can be considered areas of concurrent control and so the national and provincial spheres can have concurrent powers over those, in which case if issues arise, the two spheres would need to cooperate to solve them. In any case there would have to be a consultative process leading to drafting of guiding rules of which areas provinces would need to be solely responsible for etc.

Such concurrence and exclusivity would give both levels of government, some level of autonomy and dependence, which is what is needed for federalism to help spur development. The municipalities will also have their tasks some of which may be assigned by the provincial and national spheres etc.

So what?

If we were able to embark on something like this, we would be on our way towards achieving real democracy as embraced at the turn of the 1990s by enhancing participation in development. The system would also contribute more to the socio-economic transformation and service delivery agenda of the country, besides enhancing the management of the diversity that is characterising our nation today. That way, development as we want it, may become a reality. My only warning is that, such a worthwhile endeavour, is ambitious, and for the determined-but then, if as a nation we jump only on mediocre ambitions, we shouldn’t be surprised that 50 years since independence we are in a below mediocre state relative to other nations.

Lastly, I am happy to hear your views by posting your comments here on the blog, or email etc- the comments can be positive or negative and I would like it more if they would be based on either facts, or issues of law, economics or political science.

Feedback to

greenwellmatchaya@yahoo.com