Mutharika files court response to discredit evidence of Chilima, Chakwera in polls case: ‘Petitioners fail to prove alleged irregularities’

President Peter Mutharika has filed his response and sworn statements in opposition to the consolidated petitions of UTM Party president Saulos Chilima and Lazarus Chakwera of Malawi Congress Party (MCP) at Constitution Court challenging results of the presidential race in the May 21 Tripartite Elections which favoured Mutharika.

Lawyer Frank Farook Mbeta representing the President wants the court to throw out the applications for lacking evidence of irregularities and wasting court time

Chilima and Chakwera filed separate petitions disputing the May 27 Malawi Electoral Commission declaration of Mutharika as winner of the presidential race with 1 940 709 votes representing 38.57 percent followed by Chakwera with 1 781 740 votes representing 35.41 percent with Chilima finishing third and ahead of four other aspirants with 1 018 369 votes representing 20.24 percent.

The petitioners cite irregularities, especially in the results management process, as some of the factors justifying nullification of the presidential election.

The High Court consolidated the petitions into one case and referred the matter to Chief Justice Andrew Nyirenda who subsequently certified it as a constitutional matter and assigned a five-judge panel to hear the case as a Constitutional Court.

The five-judge panel comprises Healey Potani, Mike Tembo, Dingiswayo Madise, Ivy Kamanga and Redson Kapindu.

Through private practice lawyers led by Frank Farouk Mbeta, President Mutharika, a professor at law, is asking the court to dismiss the petitioners’ case.

Mutharika has filed sworn statements in support of his case through the worn statements of Dr. Ben Malunga Phiri (Minister of Local Government), Bob Chimkango a private practice lawyer and more than 50 monitors who witnessed the whole process from voting to counting of the votes in the areas alleged by Chilima and Chakwera to have irregularities.

According to court documents seen by Nyasa Times, President Mutharika discredited the evidence of the petitioners as “lacking and wanting in all material respects.”

In response, Mutharika through lawyer Mbeta argue that the Chilima and Chakwera have heavily relied on the use of the alteration fluid known as Tippex as a basis to nullify the election.

“The Petitioners have deliberately failed to adduce the source documents ( Forms 60C) which are the stream results in order to contradict the results sheets that were relied upon by MEC (form 60c) when announcing the results,” lawyer Mbeta argues for Mutharika.

“The Petitioners have miserably failed to tell the court the effect of the alterations on the votes polled by the candidates.

“The petitioners have also failed to tell the court the fact that alteration fluid used was only for reconciliation of the figures and not to change the votes of the candidates.”

According to Mutharika’s response, Chilima and Chakwera have failed in their evidence (sworn statements) to prove the alleged irregularities.

Furthermore, Chilima and Chakwera have failed to show how the alleged irregularities if at all they existed, affected the outcome of the results.

President Mutharika has also filed Skeletal Arguments buttressing the arguments as contained in the sworn statements.

Mutharika is asking the Court to dismiss the Petition as it lacks merit and is a waste of courts time and resources.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Scott M Huber
Guest

There are many facets to the argument of fraud in the votes and talley’s of the election and the APM / MEC regime! TIPP-EX is a major concern so as I have been saying on FB have the TIPP-EX DOCUMENTS scanned by Magnetic Resonance Imaging, (MRI), or CT so to reveal the original imprints on the documents! Tampering with TIPP-EX clearly creates suspicion along with breach of security of the ballot boxes held in unauthorized private domains and fake or unauthorized ballots and papers accepted as credible all corrupt the honorable purity of the vote! Then we have also the… Read more »

Kanyimbi
Guest
Kanyimbi

Ambwiye che Muthalika a Chilima ndi a Chakwera akuti MEC itulutse mapepala amene analembapo zoti inuyo mwawina eeeh ndidabwa ine inu ndi player mukusewera mpira ndiye referee wakupatsani penalty ndiye mwachinya tsopano team mwaichinyayo yakamang’ala ku SULOM ndiye team yanu yowina imakaletsa committee yomva madando a team inayo? Mbwiyache polani moto ndi ma petition anuwa inu mwatiberadi mavoti mwapwiya ndithu tilimbana nanu kumseu sitichokako.

jax
Guest
jax

What a shame to MCP/ UTM just because tipex was used then you have case, munya simunati those lawers are just eating you money then no money for the party when Fake Pastor leave MCP

Fake Petros
Guest
Fake Petros

Use your head to think (not just using it to steal. If a mere ballot paper becomes null and void for merely having tampered with it, what more tally sheets? How do you rule fraud on such things? You mean ma PO onse anangogwiridzana onse dziko la Malawi kuti ma electronics a May 2019 agwiritsr tippex? Olo by-election unamvapo anthu agwiritsapo tippex? Unazimva liti since ma elections onse kuyambira 1994? Ma phunzitse actually know that even a primary school pupil should be tidy with his/ her exam papers in case one makes a mistake. Amanena ndithu ” khwachani ndi ka… Read more »

gogomala
Guest
gogomala

the issue being raised here by the lawyer is about evidence not procedure matters. so its a totally different issue from what they asked the court in the past which was about procedures ie time that the law allows to apply to the court. this one is being argued based on failure by the other party to bring evidence. this is the starting point of many cases. in short ur saying awawa ali nkhani a court akuthelani nthawi. its normal. its up to court to agree or not. if it agrees the case continues but that doesnot n=mean the case… Read more »

Gona pa Muhanya
Guest
Gona pa Muhanya

Its not about petitioner proving there were irregularities rather its MEC to prove that there were not irregularities based on the documentation MEC used to announce the winner. If documentation is suspicions then it will automatically not pass, therefore proof that there were irregularities.

Aka
Guest
Aka

The response is cooked up. I do not think a great lawyer will give such a response

mtete
Guest
mtete

I urge APM to hire Lawyers from low density areas and not high density. I thought the court threw out a similar argument not so long ago? Why is counsel Mbeta boring us over and over?

Unfair Justice
Guest
Unfair Justice

Moti Mbetayi ndi lawyer ndithu olowa nclass ya law

Babu
Guest
Babu

Lawyer wakeyo Jacket is asign of failure.

Maunits
Guest
Maunits

Muthalika what he knows is that the case should be dismissed and it is waste of court time kkkkkkk what type lawyer is this one. How many times should the court buff you on the matter. This case can not be dismissed basing on your wish. Just give the court your evidence. Your wife who announced you as winner is asking the court to extend time because she has no evidence at hand yet she announced in 10 minutes after injunction but now she does not have evidence but ask the court to go and get sworn affidavits from all… Read more »