Mutharika outlines 5 grounds to form basis of appeal: ‘Why MPs vote acceptable yet from same electoral process?’

February 6, 2020 Zawadi Chilunga - Nyasa Times 130 Comments

President Peter Mutharika has outlined what will form the basis of appeal grounds in rejecting Monday’s ruling by the Constitutional Court (ConCourt) which annulled the results of last year’s election, saying among others the ConCourt  acted outside its jurisdiction and made determinations on matters that were not before it.

Samuel Tembenu, Charles Chidongondo  Mhango and others lawyers for Mutharika have instructions  to appeal.-Photo by Lisa Kadango

State House spokesman Mgeme Kalilani confirmed  that there are five grounds that will form the basis for appeal grounds.

The said ConCourt  misdirected  itself on how the law applies to the facts of the case.

He also said the five judges’ panel made determinations on matters that were not before it.

“There was an incoherent   and inconsistent application of the rationale and basis for the nullification  of the  presidential results,” said Kaliani citing one of the basis for appeal.

He also said there was “selective justice” in the same that the court treated  the presidential results as unacceptable  while the Parliamentary results as acceptable “when both results came from  the same process which they faulted  and admonished .”

The President also argues that the ConCourt  acted outside is jurisdiction and against the principle of separation of powers by ordering Parliament to amend some laws to agree with its judgement .

“The court acted against jurisprudence   principals by purporting to overturn a Supreme Court decision on the definition of majority  in the Malawi electoral process to accommodate their judgement,” said Kalilani.

Reading the judgement, Healy Potani  who chaired the panel of judges, said: “We are satisfied that the petitioners’ complaint alleging  undue return has been made out both qualitatively and quantitatively. Consequently, we hold that the  first respondent [Mutharika] was not duly elected as President of Malawi. As a result, we hereby order nullification of the elections.”

Mutharika, a lawyer by profession, with expertise in international economic law, international law and comparative constitutional law, said  alongside his legal team he had “serious reservations with the judgement.”

In his special address to the nation on Wednesday, Mutharika pointed out that  he and his legal team has noticed fundamental errors in the judgement that cannot go unchallenged.

While he noted that the ConCourt clearly did not claim rigging, t  he ConCourt judgment if not cured, represents a “flawed precedence”  for all the elections in all future elections in the country.

Lawyer Frank Mbeta who represented Mutharika in the petition case has confirmed to have received “ instructions from our client to appeal.”

Mbeta said they are  formulating the grounds of appeal and will be filed with the court.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
Follow us in Twitter

130 replies on “Mutharika outlines 5 grounds to form basis of appeal: ‘Why MPs vote acceptable yet from same electoral process?’”

  1. Hahahahaha i wish you folks can see both sides of the coin! The guy is whatever you think he is to you……..and now look at his arguments for appealing, they are legit!……..mmemo waguru anagudura kale aChilima ndianzawooo mu 2019 mommuja. Apapa basi lets serve ukaidi oyendera omwewu. Otherwise awaso ali ndimodusa mwawo, nawoso simakape. ENAWO SIANAKASUMA, ASIYENISO AWA APANGE APPEAL….MUMAONA NGATI DEMOCRACY NDIMASEWERA, NDIIMENEYI! osamangolubwalubwa!

  2. KKKKKKKK AMBWIYE ZIDIKILANI MILANDU NDI ANZANU,MWAZUNZA AMALAWI NTHAWI YOKWANILA.KUMENEKO KUMVA MPANDO KUKOMA????? ZOOPSYA NDIPO DPP MWAONETSA SHOW KU MALAWI HEHEHEHEHEH!!!!!!

  3. I think this is a good opportunity for the clueless and intellectually-challenged Mutharika to expose his ignorance of the law! The ruling is what the PPE Act Section100(4) prescribes when non-compliance has been established and the orders are to ensure the ruling is effectively implemented. That clueless and intellectually challenged Mutharika and his lawyers do not understand this underscores and vindicates what some of us have always known: Mutharika is intellectually-challenged and do not be fooled by the titles he wears on his forehead or sleeves!!!! More importantly, we should not have a cabinet at a time we are preparing for fresh elections—plse send all the cabinet ministers packing, they are using tax-payers monies to campaign for clueless Mutharika and DPP!!!

    2. mchisala, you are so politically dull and pitifully wicked that you can vomit such pathetic vituperation against a learnt professor of law, APM, the Queen’s. Counsel – a secondary school dropout like you. Million tons of shame on you!

  4. Just go to court, why making news out of it? Perhaps seeking sympathy? The court will analyse your appeal and provide remedy as is deserved

    1. That is not the point. The point is the REASON for nullification. If the ConCourt had found that APM rigged the election i.e. he had stolen the votes, then the issue would have been the presidential election only. But the ConCourt faulted MEC processes hence all MEC elections that were determined by the same MEC irregularities should be nullified. Chakwera is a tippex MP so why is it OK? APM will presumably not ask the supreme court to nullify the other elections, he is likely to argue that the ConCourt recognised MPs hence it should also recognise his victory since it is the same MEC procedures that elected all.

      1. Akulu ngati ma MP sanakasume that is their choice. The question was on Presidential vote. Actually this is the very reason that shows clearly that the Presidential vote was stolen. The parliamentary vote had no tipex

      2. Unfortunately, no single person came up with evidence to show that the parliamentary results were fraudulent. If I remember very well even when the issue of MPs surfaced it was set aside because the petitioners’ case was on presidential results.

  6. Inu a lawyer a Mbeta mungofuna Magazi ku mtundu wa a Malawi. What exactly are you looking for? Chilungamo chiposete yapa. Musawapusitse a president Pitala because you want money no. Even if you win the appeal people will want referendum, kapena ndiye mungazamvetsetde.

  7. Ma kandideti omwe amaona kuti chilungamo chabvuta ku constituency adapita ku khoti kukadandaula. Tisayiwale kuti ena zidawayendera monda olemekezeka a Vuwa Kaunda pamene wena zidawabvuta. tikumbukenso kuti okadandaula ku Concourt adali ma kandideti a chisankho cha pulezidenti osati u MP.

  8. The grounds made by Mgeme are not coming from Mgeme himself but a certain crooked lawyer who wants to milk the old nyapapi. Imagine, from the layman like me, I know the issue which was brought before the concourt was the presidential case and not concerning the parliamentarians. So you mean the judges could make a ruling on a case which was not brought before them? What a judge says becomes a law (un written law), ask the labour guys. A Mbeta ikokeni nkhaniyi chemwali anga akudikira ndalama yomweyo atakupatseni Nyapapi kuti nyumba ija ithe.

  10. Mtima oti nsapite ndekha. Let him appeal. Mlamu unali wa Presidential polls apanga bwanji appeal on parliamentary basis?

  11. Lol, but this president is funny! Doesn’t he know that there is not valid ground on all those 5 points for for appeal? This time he is going to loose more miserably than in the first ruling. He must ask the master of appealing, Jacob Zuma of South Africa.

    The guy appeals and re appeals and re appeals again, but he keeps loosing miserably. Mark my words, this guy is seeking the same type of humiliation, and he will get it .

    1. Kodi ma MP ayipa lero chifukwa cha chigamulo cha pa February 3. Mmayesa ndi ma MP omwewa munkakawawerengera State of the Nation Address komanso kuwapempha kuti achite pass ma budget awiri dzana lija? kkkkkkkkkk

  14. The truth is, the ConCourt judgement has also nullified the parliamentary and assembly poll results. MEC administered these the tripartite elections on the same day through the same system of Tippex and presiding officers who did not do their job.

  15. He has the right to appeal because APM wants to know why the judges refuse the bribes? They errored there. If they accepted the bribes we couldn’t have appealed but they refused.

  16. It was appointed for man to live six score and ten years (70yrs) on earth. If a man surpasses 70 yrs on earth it is by God’s grace. The old man Muthalika has been given that privilege to live beyond 70 years but he still finds it convenient to accumulate riches by theft. Repent old man, seek God and think about your eternal destination. Beg God to grant you more grace to repent. Where do you get the guts to keep robbing public funds you wretched nasty old man? Look yourelf on the mirror and see how old you’ve become. At least love your soul one more time! Seek God old man not an appeal. You sound defeated yet still stubborn like a brute!!! I hope this message gets you you wretch!

  17. Where the judges failed is to rule tear ACB / Police now investigate who arranged fir Tippex to be supplied to polling stations and if APM paid for the rigging.

  18. This is good. The courts will be prompted to go deeper in the case until the get all culprits and bring them to book. Who ordered ripe zing of results? Who flouted the constitution? Who benefited from the stolen votes etc. somebody will be arrested for sure!

  20. Chisankho chapatatu amaterotu. Kudera kumene wopikisana u MP sanakhutire ndi zotsatira chisankho anakadandaula kukhothi. Ndiye mbuyacheyu akuti chani kulubwalubwa.

  21. Mr Mutharika ts tym fo u to pack up yo thingz en go…we are tired of yo corrupt regime….plz leave this country in peace

  22. Just like the so called malawians were free to demonstrate coz it was their right, let apm also appeal, he is a malawian.

  23. One more ground the judges ruled on issues they were not petetioned. who told them about 50+1 and who told them to rule to restore Chilima

  24. now I understand why this man is called pumbwa. judges do not judge a case which is non existence in the corridors of the court bwana pumbwa. court gives direction and a ruling bwana. join chimulirenji and cry together basi appeal attracts more embarrassment dare it! we will continue laughing at you bwana professor

  25. Though I am not a lawyer, I was once told that in law, there are two terms as: ‘Obiter dicta’ and ‘dicta’. Dicta is the main judgement. In this case, the dicta is that Mutharika was not dully elected as President of Malawi and therefore, there must be a fresh election within 150 days. Obiter dicta refers to a judge’s expression of opinion uttered in court or in a written judgement but which is not essential to the decision and therefore not legally binding as a precedent. In this case therefore, the obita dicta is the advice that the judges have issued on what should happen next

    2. I agree with you, the legal system is tired with every presidential election ending up in court. They have noted that this can be prevented and have suggested to parliament how they think this cycle of election then court can be stopped

    3. Agalu atumbuka, mwapanga nullify presidential vote because you want APM out! Leaving parliamentary because mukuteteza hule wanu gotani hara.
      Mukhaula tripartite elections Pano. If you say MEC flawed with the system, it was the whole electoral system, not only presidential. Achokanso nyaHara wanuyo.

  26. kodi premise ya khani inali chani? presidential,parliamentary or cancellor.Please presidential advisers tell my president there is no case to appeal.ma MPs were not part to the case

    3. I can not clearly recall who petitioned. Was it Chakwera or MCP. Was it Chilima or UTM. Obviously if it were the two individuals as presidential candidates the concourt has no business considering parliamentary elections. Thats why those MPs who felt aggrieved went to court and apparently the ruling has boosted their case. The right to seek justice rest with the aggrieved so it’s not strange that some decided to accept the loss and move on.

    1. Jezebel cannot resign. Even her face tells the story.
      Ngakhale argument akubweretsa ati “nanga ma voti ama MPs? Si chitsankho chinali chimodzi?” Only makes sense mwina kwa mbutuma. Ma judge actually said ma irregularities were WIDESPREAD, NOT that the ENTIRE voting process was fraud. And in fact ma MPs omwe anawona kuti analakwilidwa launched their own petitions. Ena zinawayendera ena iyayi.
      Lumping the whole thing as one and the same thing is simply BIZARRE and does not make sense

  28. THATS VERY TRUE MR PRESIDENT MUSABWERESO KU LILONGWE NDINU MBUZI YAMANO KUNSI MOTI SIMUKUONA BATA MUDZIKOMUNO NGATI MUNAWINA LOWANI BWALO OVATA TILIPO NDIPO AMALAWI TAGWILIZANA NALO COURT

    MUKANENA ZA MA MP AMENESANAKONDWENSO ALI KU COURT SUCH AS MANGOCHI MONKEYBAY

  29. APM should be happy that the judgement is fair, by the way how did he escape disqualification? the grounds to form basis of appeal can not apply in this scenario because the Con Court faulted MEC not APM,, he is just a beneficially of poor election management by MEC,.. Please advice him ndipata ndipata anapata bala.

  32. The grounds for appeal are justifiable. The petitioners did not ask the concourt to amend the constitution rather to nullify. Secondly, in 2019 we had tripartite elections i.e. elcetions for president, mps and concillors so if MEC messed up with the electoral laws it means the whole tripartite elections be annulled and not selective. The impression here is like we had only presidential elections. And surprisingly the ruling repeatedly quoted the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections(PPE) so it is absurd just to target presidential and leaving parliamentary aspect. Law experts be serious on this issue otherwise you will mislead the nation so in my view i agree with the first respondent’s decision for appeal. Not that fresh elections should not be held but rather should have another fresh “TRIPARTITE ELECTIONS” only that then the judgement will be credible otherwise no.

    3. 1. The ConCourt only suggested parliament to amend the constitution. Parliaments can refuse.
      2. The petitioners only asked for the nullification of the presidential election results and the ConCourt ruled within the confinement of the request. Nothing wrong here. The losing parliamentarians can ask for a similar nullification which they may be able to win.

    4. Chataika!!!!! pls note that the courts can only rule on what is before them!!! that was what the petitioners put to the judges!
      SOOOOOOOO!
      The judges only nullified the presidential vote! because the other 2 elections were not contested!!!!!
      BUT YOU HAVE A POINT. THEREFORE……
      if you lost in 1 or both the other 2 elections pls make your own petition!

    5. Ndi inu anzeru kwabasi! Mbuzi zinazi Pano, kapena titi ng’ona zili panozi, zingotokota anyhow, sakudziwa what they are talking about.

    6. It’s simple, MPs elections were not in scope of the litigation. Even a 10 year old can derermine this. Wasting Malawian people’s time…

      It’s a decision by 5 judges; not one.

      Get a life and move on. Do you think the 5 judges did not consult?

      Achina Kanyenda, Mbeta you greedy lawyers are misleading your client. Kanyenda ndi kuba kwake kuja, wants kumudyera APM kwasala.

      A Kanyenda muzamangwidwa when leadership changes.

    7. It’s the losing presidential contestants who sued so the court could not act on what was brought before them. Ma MP ndi ma Councillor akhoza kukasuma paokha ngati akufuna

    8. Those MPs who were not happy with the Election and or the out come of results from there madela awo they went to Court, and they have there cases being solved! What is wrong with you and your Bubu? It’s you who have decided to be misled by you Stupid called the President, you think we are all useless? Kagwele uko! Matekenya yako.

  33. If these are the grounds, even I as a lay person in law, I am convinced that the appeal cannot fly. It will only serve as an embarrassment! For instance, the ConCourt could not have made any determination regarding parliamentarians because there was no case of that nature before them. The two petitioners were challenging the presidential component of the elections. What the president forgets is that some aggrieved individuals have on separate occasions challenged parliamentary elections as was the case in Mangochi where there was nullification of the same.

    Regarding separation of powers, I am sure the five judges do not deserve to be educated by the president or Frank Mbeta for that matter on the meaning of separation of powers. A court can order any branch of government to undertake a task in accordance with the constitution. As a matter of fact, by ordering the appropriate branch of government to do its work, they are doing a good job. That in itself is recognition of separation of powers. The powers to order parliament to do its work is derived from a constitutional provision that gives ConCourt latitude to determine effective remedies when dealing with cases of this nature. Ordering legislature to do its work is one such remedy!!!

    The ConCourt did not overturn the Supreme Court decision. They simply made an observation that the term “Majority” was wrongly interpreted in the Chakuamba case of 1999. One wonders whether the President or his lawyers or indeed Mgeme are reading the same judgment that is in the public domain.

    One would also want to know specifics of determinations that were not before ConCourt.

    1. i concur with Sir Amedeus, nullifying the who tripartitw elections would imply that the submissions of the petiioner’s requested for that. and nullifying the tripartite would as well be outside the petioner’s pertitions. so even going back to one of the grounds they are basing on, “the concourt made determination on matters that were not before them or in the petions, so my question is, was the idea of nullifying parliamentary also present in the petition and it was left out?”

      1. The petitioners did not mention anything about MPs in their submissions, it’s only the type educated fools we have in this Country, i think they are taking Malawians for granted these fools! Malawi is ready to change and it will happen.

    3. Well put and well thought Amadeus. You sound more analytical and you can advise better than the qualified lawyers in the name of Mbeta and Kanyenda.

  34. You have the right to appeal bwana APM,but you have done your part plz. Just leave it for the sake of reputation and Malawi at large.

  35. Your Excellency, its time for a reality check. Have you seen a recording of yourself answering the question in an interview at the Investment Conference in London? You looked old, tired and burnt out. You in fact were an embarrassment for us Malawians.
    Have you closely observed your Ministers and Senior DPP party officials? They have nothing in common with you, they are mediocre who are no match to your intellectual prowess. Everyone of them is ready to stab you in the back, many of whom are preparing to support Chilima as leader of DPP. Both you Sir, and Bingu corruptly made billions, you have enough to retire on and live in luxury in Malawi or even in USA or anywhere else. So Sir before a new government arrests you demonstrate some love and loyalty for Malawi and step down. Forget suing etc. Instead leave office in dignity whilst you can.

      1. Good advise but like the 3 🙈🙉🙊 Mutharika cannot see hear or speak. Mutharika like a puppet is being controlled by the wife who shares his bad. Surly Mr President you should be thinking of your own future and that of Malawians not your wife. What’s wrong with you grow up you are already 80 years old.

  36. What President Munthalika was talking is right, the judgent was good but somewhere there is an error, why jugdets look only president seat more over ther was MP with same last year election, if we suppose to vote again which means in all position from counsellor , Minister of Parliament and President

    2. APM is mad! People should understand that the aggrieved councilor candidates, MP candidates or presidential candidates had to petition the court with their evidence on their own and not as a team. SKC and LC went separately but the COnCourt amalgated their petitions since they were common in nature and purpose! That is why we have seen some MP election results in some constituencies being nullified. If the SKC or LC had not petitioned the courts, the nullification would not have happened. And you know the MPs results or councilors results were being completed at ward and constituency levels not at national tally center where APM and Jane answer were manipulating the results for presidential candidates, thinking he would not be caught.

  37. They will yield nothing.

    Lazarus and SKC were Presidential candidates yet hence they petitioned the courts on top of that the evidence was overwhelming.

    some MPs are having problems with it while have cases to answer through MEC.

    aliyense akuzimenyera yekha nkhondo.

  39. This regime just wants to waste our time. cases before the courts were filed as separate cases. They can not say parliamentary elections were accepted therefore presidential elections should also be accepted. Have they forgotten that there are cases before courts about MPs elections? Some of the cases have already been concluded and their own MPs, eg in Mangochi have lost their seats in Parliament. Kicks of the dying horse. This time they will not be able to block anything which Malawians want. Last time the 50 plus one bill was defeated because of selfish people like Tembenu and Uladi Mussa. This time these people are no longer their. Even the Speaker will not dance to their tune because she is from opposition. When God wants His people to be freed, no matter how one may try to block, they will be freed. I am not surprised to see what is happening. In the bible, we read about Pharaoh. Each time Israelites were about to be freed, he hardened his heart even more. Today we see the same happening, Muthalika, Jane Ansah, Alufandika Dausi, Ntaba and others are hardening their hearts by doing things contrary to what Malawians want. The writting is on the wall, but they cant read indeed. The judgement is being praised all over the world and yet someone says I will appeal. Let him appeal, he will be embarrased like a fool now.

    1. Agree that’s the whole point… wasting people’s time. Delaying tactics.

      If Pitala and MEC lose the second time, which is inevitable, that will be the final nail in the coffin.

  40. Did any of the two petitioners challenge parliamentary results? NO! Does that stop anyone from challenging presidential results? Certainly NO! That basis of challenge being advanced is of unsound nature and will fall flat on its face. UTM/MCP challenged the conduct of the presidential ballot and that is what they got? Infact, I can bet my bottom Tambala if they challenged the parliamentary elections too and demanded a revisit on electoral residue DPP would be very lucky if they got 15 seats after that.

      1. Majotie Majotie Majotie!! I think we should allow them to appeal for those grounds of MPs,, guys this will be the end of this Demon Progressive Party.

    1. the question is anaonetsetsa VAR to come up with an appeal ,APM akudyeratu money yako akukupopawo

  44. Errand boys 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Thamangani ma lawyer. Make fools of yourselves for money🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

  45. Exodus 14 vs 4 “Then I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, so that he will pursue them; and I will gain honor over Pharaoh and over his army…” This was God’s instruction to Moses and the children of Israel when HE came down to deliver them from slavery and bondage. Malawians have been crying under the bondage of official corruption that has deprived them of many deserved social services like adequate health care services just to mention a few. God has come down to rescue the masses of the impoverished Malawians. At first I became quite concerned when I heard reports that the ‘tipp-ex’ president and his legal team were up in legal arms to challenge the determination by the honorable five concourt judges. But I later got encouraged after reading the above scripture. As praying Malawians continue to cry before the God that created Malawi for them, it will be discovered that God could be deliberately hardening the heart of the Malawian Pharaoh so that that HE (God) may gain honor and glory over this Malawian Pharaoh. That is why there is this ‘five-point-based’ appeal in the pipeline. But just like in the end Pharaoh was greatly disgraced, this Malawian Pharaoh is likely to suffer the same fate. Egyptian Pharaoh’s cadets ended up getting destroyed by the RED SEA waters while he watched! The DPP cadets are likely to suffer the same fate. The RED SEA waters of the Malawian masses whom they terrorized at will, will become the cadets’ graveyard and THEY WILL BE SEEN NO MORE! Glory be to the CREATOR WHO THE RIGHTEOUS JUDGE OF ALL nations!

  47. It depends whether the anomalies, were challenged and proved or not. Process yobela mukunenayo ma MP ena sadaiwone ena analibe umboni komanso kwina kunalibe. Walke big man

  49. Parliamentary cases were not part of the issues presented by the petitioners and why should it be part of the case. Aggrieved Parliamentarian candidates to their complaint to court on individual basis and some of them lost while other s were maintained by the courts. The cases in point were nullification of results in Machinga when a DPP candidate who lost was declared winner by MEC. Another one is the case between Vuwa Kaunda and Ralph Mhone where the court maintained Vuwa Kaunda. Although I am not a Lawyer, from my layman’s point of you, I feel DPP is completely confused and out of touch with the nature of the cases at hand. The problem theta Mutharika has is that he feels our Malawian Lawyers are inferior and the mere fact that he was a professor in America he believes he is better. He will be more embarrassed if he continues with his arrogance. Come what may, we are going to the polls soon. Anthu akuba mwagwidwa. You used the money to pay MEC steal our votes on your behalf.

    1. There is a reason his feeble mind wasn’t teaching at any of the the Ivy League colleges. Not all American Colleges are equal.

  50. Ngeme, 1. Who brought the matter of MPs before the Court? 2. Within how many days of announcing results are electoral disputes supposed to be brought before court? If you have no knowledge about this, then how can you advise the old man? I now believe the old man is surrounded by useless people including Ngeme.

  51. On one hand, the regime is blaming the court for “making a determination on matters that were not before it”. Within the same breath – and with no sense of irony whatsoever – the regime is bringing up the issue of the MPs, which was clearly not before the court. It shouldn’t be allowed to have it both ways.

    Uchindere! Mxii!!

  52. Start the discussion…Mbeta asakupusitseni Muthalika pumani kaye munayesetsa ntchito munagwira ndithu zangovuta basi

  54. once beaten,twice shy,if i was APM i would resign,Malawi has been held on ransom for 9 months by APM his gurus and he still wants the country to be held at random further??,this man does not care about Malawi,he is after satisfying his personal needs shame.

  55. Apa ndi pamene ndikuwona kuti president uyu mzeru alibe. Much as he claims that the courts did not nullify the parliamentary votes, but there were few parliamentarians who challenged the results and to find that the parliamentary results were manipulated in those affected areas. What else is he looking for??? Buying time so that he must keep on looting?? Uyudi ndi mlomwedi wopanda mano ndi mzeru zomwe.

    1. ConCourt has said there were irregularities by MEC that undermined the Presidential and Parliamentary Elections (PPE). The entire tripartite elections, therefore, have effectively been annulled.

  56. WHY PETER HITLER MUTHARIKA DOESN’T LIKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COURT MADE OF CONSIDERING 50% PLUS 1. THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT ASKED THE PARLIAMENT TO CONSIDER 50% PLUS 1 BECAUSE THE PRESENT SYSTEM WILL CONTINUE TO DRAG MALAWIANS TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT EVERY TIME THERE IS A GENERAL ELECTION. THE MATTER WAS TAKEN TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT BECAUSE THE POLITICIAN THEMSELVES COULDN’T SOLVE THIS MATTER BY THEMSELVES. IT IS THE POLITICIANS THAT BREAK THE LAWS BY BRIBING PEOPLE THAT HAVE TO ENFORCE WHAT IS IN OUR CONSTITUTION. IT IS THE POLITICIANS THAT BREAK THE LAWS BY TRYING TO BRIBE THE JUDGES. SO, WHAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DID—WAS TO GIVE ALL POLITICAL PARTIES AN ASSIGNMENT THAT WHEN THEY PASS LAWS IT SHOULD BE LAWS THAT UNITE MALAWIANS AND NOT DIVIDE THEM. IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO MARGINALISE OTHERS, IT IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO BE TRIBALISTIC AND REGIONALISM. THESE THINGS HAVE BEEN EXHIBITED BY PETER HITLER MUTHARIKA AND HIS DPP THUGS.

  57. Sha!!! I cant see how any of the appeal grounds can succeed. The case was on presidential elections determined on national level. Parliamentary elections are determined on constituency level and those who had grievances have gone to court as we have witnessed so we cant bring in parliamentary elections into this case. The High court/Constitutional court is mandated by our constitution to review any law,action or decision of which this court has done and made recommendations to parliament. IT HAS NOT ORDERED but RECOMMENDED parliament to look into, so the question of separation of powers does not arise. APM don’t appeal avoid embarrassing yourself further!!!! After all you have agreed to fresh Presidential elections

  58. The case was about presidential election, not MP’s. The later is a different issue and for APM’s information, MP cases, 2 in Mangochi and 3, I think, in the lower Shire are in progress.

    Please don’t mix the two issues in your appeal to avoid ridiculing yourself.

  61. TATIYENI KU SUPREME KONKO TIKAWONE NGATI AMUTHARIKA SAKAWOMBA KHOMA, CHONDE LAW YER FRANK MBETA MUSIYENI MUTHARIKA MUSAMUPUSITSE NDI KUMAMUDYEA NDALAMA ZAKE

  62. The MPs some are being declared Null and Void too so the parliamentary one wasn’t acceptably in some instances you idiot and those Nsanje thieves MPs of yours are soon gonna be thrown out!

  63. I want to comment on two issues only as raised by the president as his ground for contemplating an appeal. The first one is that the ConCourt disregarded the definition of “majority” as held by the Supreme Court of Appeal. On this ground, as far as I know in law, a decision of a higher court binds all lower courts unless if it was wrong among others. In this regard, the ConCourt was of the view that the definition was incorrect, therefore it was not bound to follow that definition. On the second issue that the ConCourt found the presidential election to have been mismanaged and not the parliamentary elections although both were based on the same facts, and should not have nullified only the presidential elections; my view is that an aggrieved party approaches a court of law to seek a specific relief (this is called a “prayer”) and it is this prayer that is granted if the court is satisfied that the aggrieved party has adduced sufficient evidence to support its case. I wonder if in this case there was a prayer to nullify the parliamentary elections as well. The court cannot be expected to grant relief which was not pleaded.

    1. Sadziwa anthuwa amweneeeee kaya titani kaya…mwana akalira nyanga yansatsi musiye imfotere m’manja kkkkkkk awa ndiye atenga yofota fota ndithu!!!

    2. Angoni, you are wrong. Court judgements can sometimes have serious implications on a related issue – in fact, remedy a problem that was not brought to court.

  65. Jesus Christ is disturbed by the criminal actions by Ms. Jane Ansah, MEC, and their legal counsel. He is also worried that the nation of Malawi will lose direction by the action of one selfish individual at State House.

  66. The issue of whether the 192 Parliamentary Elections were free and fair is handled on case by case basis .One seat in Mangochi was already declared vacant and election rerun ordered by Justice Kalembera on the very same grounds of massive irregularities,we also witnessed the Nkhata Bay Central seat case which is now at Supreme Case, Minister Vuwa Kaunda will likely lose the case.

    The problem is that DPP used very old tricks to rig elections.

  68. These lawyer are business men. You mean they can’t see that the issue brought to court was specific and contextual. (Why bringing MP and councils). When the court ruled for a re-run for MP in Lilongwe during last election what happened to other MPs and President?
    We all know that according to the five judges; there is only one reason for nullifying the election; where are you getting other reasons. Read again before you embarrass yourself.

    1. These guys got it wrong during the case and they are repeating. They were busy defending rigging accusation while the case was irregularity. Today they come again with their misfiring approach. Shame.

  69. thats good how can they apply selective justice by leaving members of parliament aside when all this was done in one pot

  70. We had sewege problem in Liongwe where people were drinking water with feaces. To a well thinker you can’t say ,water coming from the same broken system is bad but the feaces are ok. It’s the same with this issue. The same flawed system accepted the MPS votes yet the same flawed system used rejected the presidential votes.Even a standard one pupil of Nsundwe can smell a rotten judgement. Ma lawyer a correspondence awa a ku Katioto School of Law

  71. The case was about the presidential elections not parliamentary so why should the judges nullify the parliament election?You should ashamed of yourself of this type of leadership who wants to cling to power even though people don’t want you.Which school did you go for your law academics?Challenge the opposition parties that you won the elections free and fair by declaring yourself that you are ready the coming elections that the CONCOURT has ordered.

  72. This is nice mufuna ma MPso akhuzidwe eti nkhani yabwino tiyeni nazoni tivotaso ndi zama MP zomwe tione ngati mungakwanise ma MP ten, mukuiyambayi nde simuimaliza ndithu

  73. Judges muphwisa apa. The valid ground for appeal take it very serious. The same flawed system which accepted the mps now is sgaibts the presidential vote as invalid? Munya muona. U lawyer was corespondence

  74. Agogowa akuwona ngati ndife opusa ndipo sititha kuwelenga eti. He is clearly trying to cancel the elections.
    Timothy Mtambo alikuti, tidzipita panseu

  75. Ziliko, akuti Constitutional Law professor koma palibe cha nzeru chomwe chaonetsapo kuti munthu amadziwa malamulo adziko. Bolani kalipentala angathe kumvetsa

    1. The petitioner’s went t court on a specific issue which is that of the presidential election not members of the Parliament so the court was dealing with the issue that was brought to them work up petulo times have changed sAa

Comments are closed.