Governance Platform back Mutharika’s rejection of electoral bills

The Joint Civil Society Platform on Good Governance (JCSPGG) has thrown its weight behind President Peter Mutharika’s refusal t to assent the Electoral Law Bills, arguing the bills were politically motivated and in conflict with the constitutional provisions.

Chodzi: There is no justification of amending an Act of Parliament which is in direct conflict with the Constitution

JCSPGG national director Fryson Chodzi says in a statement issued on Thursday that contrary assertions by some quarters, the President is within his constitutional mandate and is upholding the Constitution by not assenting to the bills.

“The law gives the President power to either assent or withhold his assent and what the President did is lawful. We further question the claims by some quarters that the President is in contempt of the courts by not assenting to the stated bills, when the law is very clear on the processes including Section 73 (2) which allows the President to return a bill with notification of reasons to the Speaker of National Assembly for further debate,” says Chodzi.

He adds that it is their considered opinion that the Constitutional Court direction to Parliament to enact necessary electoral laws did not necessarily mean that the lawful procedures in amending and enacting laws should be violated.

“We further note the intimidation and undue pressure, which has been exerted on Parliament, Judiciary and the Executive with great concern. This is a violation of the Constitution of Malawi. For the first time in Malawi, parliament has been held at political ransom which led to passing bills that were in conflict with the constitution of Malawi.

“Members of Parliament have been intimidated, insulted and forced to vote for a certain political agenda which is unfortunate. Sadly, we have allowed non – elected but self-appointed individuals and groups without any Constitutional mandate to dictate how MPs must work,” claims Chodzi in the statement.

He says the Platform is of the strong view of the need to amend the constitution electoral laws to ensure parity than what Malawi witnessed in the just ended parliament where shortcuts were adopted just to fulfil a political agenda.

“There is no justification of amending an Act of Parliament which is in direct conflict with the Constitution, and that defeats the entire spirit of both the Ruling of the ConCourt and framers of the Constitution,” he charges.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :

Sharing is caring!

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Follow us in Twitter
36 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Omex70
Omex70
8 months ago

Iwe cadet, Fryson Chodzi asakukudziwa ndani kuti ukati wadya umadalira DPP? Every time ntchito yako ndikuikira kumbuyo DPP and Peter. So don’t cheat us that you are running an organization worthy called governance organization.

Munthu
Munthu
8 months ago

This man sounds like an MBC employee or a Cadet!

Jose
Jose
8 months ago

GOVERNANCE YAKE ITI KUNAMIZA ANTHU BASI GOOD GOVERNANCE BEGINS WITH FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS.SO SOMEONE PEDDLING OFF ELECTIONS LAWS YOU CALL THAT ELECTIONS.

Chio
Chio
8 months ago

JCSPGG is right. MPs can’t just change an Act. They need two-thirds majority which they failed to get. Concourt judges must be having sleepless nights because their judgement is wholly flawed because it can’t stand on two legs.

Malawi belong to the citizens

Mwalandira zingati, Moti abale ndi alongo akumudzikwanu akusangala? Munali phe nthawi Yonseyi azibambo osaganiza.

Mtete
Mtete
8 months ago

Can’t remember any positive contribution by fryson on any issues articulated by the opposition. Uteleku amufumbatitsa.

Joloza
8 months ago
Reply to  Mtete

Osaiwala zigawenga Za HRDC zimalandira kuchokera Ku MCP. Fryson sakhala oyamba kufambatitsidwa

RECENTS
8 months ago

Good. Your are using your time profitably. Make money from these idiots. Before they are buried.

APM Akuthanyulidwa
APM Akuthanyulidwa
8 months ago

Kkkkkkkk🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Ma cadet.

William
William
8 months ago

Kodi mukuti ili mu conflict ndi section iti ya constitution?? Please clarify in detail which sections are in conflict? Don’t just say things in vain

Banda
Banda
8 months ago
Reply to  William

Did the opposition manage to change the constitution? They failed to get 2/3 majority so any bill they passed is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

Duan
Duan
8 months ago

The opposition need to realise that their failure to get a two-thirds majority rendered the bills illegal and unconstitutional. The Supreme Court needs to understand that Concourt erred in making a judgement that is subject to politics. The courts are going to be humiliated in the end because they cannot control political processes and outcomes.

Country boy
Country boy
8 months ago
Reply to  Duan

Slowly Hi5 judges are being exposed. Let the fallen pastor go home and start farming

shares
Read previous post:
Covid-19 rumours cost Golden Peacock Hotel huge business

Business has come to a standstill at the Golden Peacock Hotel in Lilongwe following social media rumours that the hospitality...

Close