Gwalidi’s re-examination exposes illegalities in Malawi 2019 elections

Second  witness of UTM  Party Mirriam Gwalidi’s re-examination in the historic presidential elections case at the Constitutional Court  in Lilongwe has exposed a lot of alterations in the way votes were managed during the May 21 elections.

UTM Party lawyers brainstorm during court recess.-Photo by Lisa Kadango, Mana

Gwalidi’s,  who is being re-examined by lawyer  Bright Theu for first petitioner Saulos Chilima, told the pannel of five judges hearing the case that she found some monitors making deliberate alterations in Blantyre City which affected the counting of total valid cast votes for both candidates and station tally results.

The alterations, she said, were either through using of fake tally sheets or white correction fluid Tippex.

For example, Gwalidi said she personally found a presiding officer, assistant presiding officers and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)  monitors altering results for Ndirande Matope center.

“When I asked about the log books at the tally center, I was told they are locked up and cannot be accessed and I was also told that the tally sheets were also locked up in the headmaster’s office at Ndirande School center.

“After we discussed, they agreed that they were altering results without using actual figures. I lodged a complaint but they refused to sign for it. Later at Ndirande Matope, I found monitors who said the presiding officer was changing results in their  presence. I again lodged a complaint and left,” said Gwalidi, who was a roving monitor for UTM from the main Malawi Electoral  Commission (MEC) Tally Center.

She further cited three cases of alterations like Home Primary School and Kankhombe School.

At Gole School said Gwalidi, spoiled votes and total number were altered, unused ballots total number were altered as well as the total null and void which led to the column of total valid cast votes to be altered as well.

“Once this happen, the total cast votes per candidate change again because the reconciliation votes used are altered,” she said.

At Kakhobwe School, Gwalidi told the court that there were a total of 15 valid cast votes which were not counted for which in turn affected the total count which after talking it showed a total of 900 valid votes cast instead of 915.

“The changes were both on data reconciliation part and per candidate total vote count. This resulted into the alteration of Malawi Congress Party (MCP) candidate station and stream total votes, United Democratic Front (UDF) candidates votes were also altered and DPP stream votes were also altered,” Gwalidi told the called and further disclosed that the tally sheets she used from these centers were provided to her by DPP monitors.

After Gwalidi’s testimony, Darlington Ndasauka will be a third UTM witness to stand in the dock.

Being heard by a panel of five judges, Potani, Mike Tembo, Dingiswayo Madise, Redson Kapindu and Ivy Kamanga, the case has Chilima as the first petitioner and Malawi Congress Party president Lazarus Chakwera as the second petitioner.

Mutharika of the governing Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), in his capacity as the declared winner, is the first respondent with MEC as the second respondent.

The petitioners contend that Mutharika “won a fraudulent election” fraught with irregularities, including alleged tampering with election results sheets through correction fluid, popularly known as Tippex.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :

Sharing is caring!

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Follow us in Twitter
26 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
President Mkango Lion Manthakanjenjemereza
President Mkango Lion Manthakanjenjemereza
1 year ago

Boma iri lidaoneka anthu sitimalifuna except some greedy people, ignorant people. Then ir resorted kubera, ndiye mukhaulatu.

Destroyer of liars
1 year ago

Why can’t government move MEC headquarters to the capital city? Mchacha’s thinking is that since MEC is in the South, where he is regional governor, therefore MEC decisions should be vetted by DPP southern committee.

Justice Usiwa
Justice Usiwa
1 year ago

Sorry the day has been worse to chokoto,Let us just pray to keep Peter at HBP seat while manually fanning with our hands

mmc
mmc
1 year ago

Gwalidi and Chilima said that; no tippex affected valid votes. No invalid votes were used to declare Peter winner. If I claim that you are a thief i need to being evidence. Zinazi ndi hearsay.

cipiliro
cipiliro
1 year ago
Reply to  mmc

so which is a hearsay, one being caught red handed altering results and just been told that no tipex affected valid votes?

tizanka
tizanka
1 year ago

It’s just her words, show us the evidence mom. I can also make allegations, but where is the evidence?

Angozo
1 year ago
Reply to  tizanka

The DPP lawyers saw the evidence nanu inu. Kapena chizungu simumva? Komabe amamasulira mu chichewa, simumvanso chichewa kapena? The evidence was shown to your lawyers but you still cannot accept. Typical of DPP, you are in denial.

Patrick Phiri
Patrick Phiri
1 year ago

Gwalidi was a moving monitor. The electoral law does not recognise such a position. She was therefore not eligible to lodge a complaint. The presiding officer was right to reject her request. She should have asked the monitors assigned to the centre’s to do that. Wash out.

TAI
TAI
1 year ago
Reply to  Patrick Phiri

Does this mean she was also not eligible to say something against altering of results? The results were altered and it has been shown. The announcement of the winner was not based on real results. Wash out!!!

CEYZ
CEYZ
1 year ago
Reply to  Patrick Phiri

I beg to differ. The terminology for a “roving” monitor was instituted by MEC which stands for a monitor who is accepted by law. At the same time, anyone can lodge a complaint.

Jamws
1 year ago
Reply to  CEYZ

Agree

Kaitano
Kaitano
1 year ago
Reply to  Patrick Phiri

Useless comment from you, you think Malawians are fools? You wanted her not move around so that you do your things behind? That was God working my friend! After all she was not employed by Mec but by UTM, wagwa nayo, manyazi ulibe. Tipex brain.

Citizen #1million
Citizen #1million
1 year ago
Reply to  Patrick Phiri

The fact that she is here testifying before the constitutional court very much means that her role was recognised, if that was not the case she would have been stricken off the witness list. Am afraid you can’t start creating laws that don’t exist to claim that her role was not recognised just because you don’t lime what she is exposing

TOSH
1 year ago

CHILIMA SATENGA MBWELERA

TOSH
1 year ago

bravo gwalidi chilima satenga mbwelera

Tan
Tan
1 year ago

Kkk why did she not bring the evidence. How can things written in a notebook be evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

Kaitano
Kaitano
1 year ago
Reply to  Tan

Just for the sake of easing yourself, drop your comment cadet!

Chizamusoka
Chizamusoka
1 year ago
Reply to  Tan

The evidence is what they are cross examining and reexamining on. They are called exhibits.
Evidence from Chilima is initialed SKC while evidence from Gwalidi is coded MG.

Malawians win
Malawians win
1 year ago

Anthu oipa osakanda Malawi komanso okha. Photo ya ntchimo ndi imfa nchoncho sadzikonda okha anthu awa

shares
Read previous post:
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...

Close