Chaponda trivialises mediation on Malawi, Tanzania lake row: Says ICJ was ideal

Malawi Foreign Affairs minister George Chaponda has said the previous administration should have brought the Malawi, Tanzania Lake Malawi row to International Court of Justice (ICJ) instead of bringing it to a mediation process.

Malawi and Tanzania have disagreed over their border since independence

Malawi and Tanzania have disagreed over their border since independence

Chaponda said this Sunday during Tiuzeni Zoona programme on Zodiak radio.

“This is the best route the government should have taken. As an international lawyer, I know this is a winning case. His Excellency [President Peter Mutharika]  is also an international lawyer, he knows very well that Malawi cannot lose this case,” he said.

He said for the sake of continuity, the Peter Mutharika administration decided to continue with the dialogue path initiated by Banda but doubted if it will yield to anything.

“This dialogue has been dragging for two years now. Last time I met former president of Mozambique, His Excellency Chissano, he said they were waiting for conclusion of the elections in Malawi and Tanzania. Now that the elections are over, he said we will be invited for a meeting in Tanzania next moth,” he said.

He said a customary international law says when two countries share a lake, then both should own it in half each but the Lake Malawi situation is unique because there is a treaty with Tanzania that clearly allows Malawi to own the lake.

He said the treaty was signed by Kamuzu Banda for Malawi and Julius Nyerere of Tanzania under the sponsorship of the then Organisation of African Unity.

Malawi disputes Tanzania’s claim to half the lake – Africa’s third biggest.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :

Please share this Article if you like Email This Post Email This Post

More From Nyasatimes

More From the World

7 thoughts on “Chaponda trivialises mediation on Malawi, Tanzania lake row: Says ICJ was ideal”

  1. Mbili ya bakha says:

    Aw angotolera nkhani ngati alutola nkhuni za masanje. Nansangayatu. This guy is so clueless. No sense of direction. Zomwe akamba apazi wawerenga pa palaglafu ya archive nkumasokosera nayo. NDE nkumati aludikila uplezident. Headless mbuzi solo walowetsa mutu my n ndowa.
    Zomwe tava kale kuti a kutsogolowa akudzilamulila okha opanda checking with its citizens. Pena ndimadabwa kuti tidzichula bwanji ma citizens when we are not part of decesions made re: our own country? Its not that u decide for us but we decide together.

  2. Manuel Beni says:

    The owner of lake should not panic going to court, let Tanzania go to court if really belongs to them.

  3. Gerald mapanga phiri says:

    Chaponda don’t take Malawians as stupid. Malawians know that longtime ago. Malawians want leaders to take Tanzania to international court. Its your job to find way out. Don’t politicalize with Joyce. Don’t put Malawians back

  4. Sam says:

    Let’s just let Tanzania take over the whole Malawi. We would be better off being Tanzanian citizens then. Better citizens rights, better economy etc.

  5. Hokoyo says:

    Malawi, just tell Tanzania off. If anything, it should be Tanzania complkaning and going to court not Malawi

  6. MERCEDES says:

    MWAZOLOWERA ZOKANGANA MU PARLIAMENT NDIYE MUKUFUNA KUKANGANA NDI MOZAMBIQUE AND TANZANIA THAT LAKE BELONGS TO 3 COUNTRIES MALAWI ,MOZAMBIQUE AND TANZANIA IF YOU WANT TO DO SOME OIL BUSINESS YOU MUST CHECK WHICH SIDE OF THE LAKE IS THAT OIL SITUATED IF ITS TANZANIA SIDE YOU MUST SIT DOWN WITH TANZANIA SIDE TO SORT OUT THE WAY FORWARD SAME IF ITS IN MOZAMBIQUAN SIDE

  7. Kenkkk says:

    Eye opening. I didn’t know that Banda and Nyerere signed a treaty where Nyerere admitted malawi’s ownership of the lake. Why is Tanzania then refusing if there was this new treaty with our two leaders? I know Nyerere and Banda never got on. Never heard of these two signing a treaty. Are you sure chaponda?

    I know the colonial treaty between Britain and German gave the entire northern part of the lake to malawi. That is why our case is strongest if taken to the icj.

Comments are closed.