CSOs oppose government’s plan to provide Police security detail for DCs, CEOs, Mayors
Civil society organizations (CSOs) have issued a strong protest against government’s plan to provide Police security detail for local officials such as District Commissioners, Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), and Mayors, saying the “move is not only insensitive to the suffering of millions of Malawians but also a threat to democracy”.
The CEOs are National Advocacy Platform; Human Rights Defenders Coalition; Centre for Civil Society Strengthening; Civil Society Coalition on Accountability & Transparency; Malawi Human Rights Resource Centre; NGO Gender Coordination Network; Centre for Social Accountability & Transparency; Human Rights Consultative Committee; Youth and Society; Malawi Economic Justice Network and NGO Coalition on Child Rights.
They maintain that the move is “a potential infringement on fundamental rights and freedoms, and a cause for alarm regarding the nation’s future”.
“It exerts an economic strain into an already fragile economy in the face of the recent unprecedented disasters, high costs of living, voluminous debt and broadened electoral constituencies.”
On the essence of democracy, they stress that this right “is grounded in a delicate balance of power, transparency, and accountability”, adding that public executive and elected officials, including Mayors, CEOs, and DCs, “are entrusted with the responsibility of representing the will of the people and ensuring that government actions align with the interests of their constituents”.
“The government’s intention to introduce security mechanisms for these officials will result in the failure of these officials to be accountable to their constituents as they will not be easily accessible — thereby diminishing the political will that goes with their availability at all levels of society when required to do so.
They also observe the plan carries significant economic implications, saying “allocating resources away from vital public services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure development exacerbates socioeconomic inequalities and hampers economic growth”.
“A well-functioning democracy is crucial for attracting foreign investment and fostering a thriving business environment, but the presence of security mechanisms may signal political instability, deterring investors.
“Furthermore, the costs of establishing and maintaining these mechanisms, including salaries and infrastructure, strain the national budget, diverting funds that could promote economic prosperity, job creation, and poverty reduction. These economic concerns compound the democratic and social issues surrounding this proposal.”
Further, they say democratic systems, public servants are held accountable to the people they serve — “however, the mere presence of security forces can have a chilling effect on free speech, suppress dissent, and deter civic engagement”.
“This erosion of trust, in turn, poses a direct threat to the vitality of democracy. Historical precedent has shown that deploying security forces within civilian governance often results in the suppression of dissent and opposition.
“The very presence of such forces can intimidate citizens, dissuading them from participating in peaceful protests, expressing their opinions, or holding their leaders accountable. This stifling atmosphere is fundamentally detrimental to the democratic process and infringes upon the fundamental right to free expression.”
They also stress that this is an abuse of power, saying: “Such misuse could lead to the suppression of political opposition or activities that do not align with the public interest. These possibilities carry serious consequences for the rule of law and the overall quality of governance.
The proposal is also described as erosion of trust, which is the cornerstone of any robust democracy and sends a signal that the government “perceives its citizens as potential threats rather than as partners in nation building”.
The erosion of this trust can initiate a vicious cycle of suspicion and hostility, dividing communities and impeding societal progress,” continues the petition, adding that is also raises substantial legal and ethical questions.
“Ensuring that any such measures are in compliance with international human rights standards, the constitution, and the rule of law is imperative. A lack of transparency and accountability in this regard can have far-reaching repercussions for the country’s international reputation and overall governance.”
They thus demand reconsideration, saying they firmly believe that the preservation of democracy, respect for principles of constitutionalism on governance of state and trust from the governed safeguarding fundamental rights, and promoting transparent and accountable governance should serve as the guiding principles for any government’s actions.
“The civil society remains steadfast in its commitment to advocating for a just and democratic society where the voices of the people are not just heard but also respected.
“The concerns raised by civil society represent not merely a critique but also an opportunity for the government to demonstrate its unwavering commitment to democracy, accountability, adherence to austerity measures and the rule of law.
“The ultimate goal is to work together to create a brighter and more equitable future for the nation, founded on principles of justice, transparency, and respect for all,” concludes the petition signed on Tuesday, September 12.
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
