Court tells AG ‘no shifting goal posts’ in Malawi election case

Attorney General (AG) Kalekeni Kaphale on Thursday objected to the line of questioning by lawyers for the first petitioner Saulos Chilima to witness Mirriam Gwalidi during a friendly re-examination, saying it was soliciting opinion.

Gwalidi, who supported Chilima’s petition to have the results nullified and an order for a rerun, had taken to the witness box for re-examination from one of Chilima’s lawyers Bright Theu.

As Theu asked Gwalidi to state the irregularities which impacted on the vote results, Kaphale  told the court it was improper to ask the witness questions that solicit opinions.

Kaphale, representing Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC), second respondent in the case, indicated that the court had already stopped lawyers during cross-examination the line of questioning that seeks opinions as answers.

Not too amused with the questions, Attorney General queried if allowing such re-examination the Constitutional Court was “shifting goal posts.”

But Justice Ivy Kamanga said: “It’s not an issue of shifting the goal posts.”

She insisted: “We are not shifting the goal posts.”

Theu was then asked to ensure his questions are not soliciting opinions.

And after continue re-examination, Gwalidi remained steadfast that the results in the elections were altered by governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) monitors with presiding officers for MEC.

President Peter Mutharika, who was declared winner of the May 21 presidential race by MEC, is the first respondent and the electoral body is the second respondent.

Kaphale, joined by other lawyers, is representing MEC, being government’s chief legal adviser.

During the earlier proceeding, Chilima’s lawyers told the court that MEC failed to discharge its duty and it should, therefore, be considered that no election that could duly elect a president of Malawi under Presidential and Parliamentary Act (PPA) was conducted.

The petitioners, Chilima and Malawi Congress Party (MCP) contend that Mutharika “won a fraudulent election” fraught with irregularities, including alleged tampering with election results sheets through correction fluid, popularly known as Tippex.

The two petitioners are arguing that the tripartite elections lacked credibility and must be declared null and void. The petitioners, in the case being covered live by some local broadcasters, contend that Mutharika “won a fraudulent election” fraught with irregularities, including use of correction fluid and being found in possession of results sheets at home.