Thanks for replying to my feed. I think you make some solid points, particularly in reference to the speed with which malawi is supposed to be maturing as a democracy. However, if the courts are spending too much time regarding matters of a political nature, that is a problem within the justice system’s inability to sift out (rapidly) the differences between real and faux cases. It is not necessarily the realm of those politicians who feel they have been hard done by to limit their access to the courts. The courts are arguably one of the most important pillars of democracy and the access to them is also a margin of democratic maturity. I don’t think we need to block this. There is a reason some people feel that they have more hope having their concerns adressed in court than on other political platforms (what are they going to do, speak on Joy?) The courts may just be part of the last forms of neutrality and objectivity. These things do not develop in a vacuum. And in terms of weighing up ones success, i think you need to define what you mean by success. In this instance, i believe that success for Mr Tembo would be the exposure of tools that may have been used to “play” with the election results no matter how much. It is putting a sense of doubt in the minds of malawians who are without doubt, over the clarity of Mutharikas win.

For those of you in the diaspora, especially in UK, you know that over the past 30 – 40 years there has ben no British Prime Minister outside England. It is not by chance or coincidence. Its not that Scotland, Wales and Northern Island have no brains to rule Britain…it boils down to tribalism whether we agree with it or not. The majority population is English and is in England and they determine who becomes PM—-its just like a given fact that no Scot nor Wales has Prime Minister material no matter what. Across the mainland in Europe, you will find that voting patterns in most countries follow ethnic or tribalistic lines.

Back in our beloved Malawi, the voting pattern has not changed at all….MCP remains a rejected party in both the South and the North..this is a message from referendum in 1993…63% was for change (which was basically North plus South) and 37% was for Tambala Wakuda. MCP has remained with its 37% share of the votes ever since. UDF won in 1994, 1999 and 2004 based on its Southern majority. In 2009, although UDF or rather Muluzi switched to support MCP, the majority of the South remained firmly behind a promising Southern party -DPP. The North also chose to side with DPP. At least 60% of the voters in 2009, voted in 1993 and 1994 elections hence they still have the same image of tyranic MCP.

Why the voting pattern is like this? Of course there are many reasons to explain of which tribalism or regionalism is just one of the important ones. We cannot deny that malawi is still tribalistic and Regionalistic? Uku ndiye Nyani kukana chikundu chake.

It is obvious that some people fom the centre feel that they are victims of tribalism…but as we all know politics is a game of numbers and alliances….if the South and the North continue looking at MCP as a Central Region party, which some people from Central Region also see in relation to DPP and UDF, we will always have a President from a Southern Region dominant party.

Whether a Tumbuka and the northern region people are more intelligent than people from the South and the Centre? Oh this is another emotional issue. The Tumbukas themselves they know that this is not true but they choose to believe otherwise. No grain of argument will take this away from them. It is the same notion that the Boers have in relation to the black people, the same notion that the Aryan race of German’s Hitler had in relation to the rest of the world, the same notion that the Tutsi’s have in relation with the Hutus, the same superiority complex that the Zulus have in relation to the other tribes of South Africa, the list is endless.

Even, a Tumbuka street begger, prostitute, street vendor, harbour these feelings.

The Southern and Central regions people who have had a chance to mix with the Tumbukas in their own region (Northern region), at academic institutions, churches and work places, know very well that the Tumbukas have this feeling and complex in their heart.

In the late 80´s at Chanecllor College, the Northern block (Tumbukas, Tongas, Lambyas, Nyakyusas, etc) used to call themselves “Mbawula” in an open rebuke of their Southern and Central colleagues. It is doubtful that 20 years down the line that superiority complex has disappeared!

Back to the topic, Tembo and or any other interested party has a democratic and human right to seek court recourse for their insatisfaction with the 2009 elections. Bingu or any other person has no right whatsover, to stop someone from exercising his or her human right. The most importnat thing here is that Tembo and or whoever would like to invoke his or her right to have his or her concerns heard by an independent court, should do that peacefully without interefring with the exrcise of the rights of other people. So far there has been nothing suggesting that Tembo and others are abusing the exercise of their right.

Let democracy and human rights prevail in the way The Repulican Constitution allow.