Speaker turns to court on Mutharika’s snub of Malawi electoral reforms bill

1. kodi BINGU paja ananena kuti malamulo amakoza ndi ku parliament so this Zombie pitala eish ogah uyu. gotani mmakawerenga kunyumba za ncito yanuyi olo yu go home and celebrate the position you are on ,pleeeeasee

2. I totally agree the speaker is clueless and very partisan.How can parliament stoop so low to be subservient to appointed judges.

3. It’s always impossible for two parties to come to an agreement whenever there is a conflict. It is for this reason that we have arbitration to make a final ruling.

   APM does not agree with what parliament considered the right thing. The solution in this case is for someone, the Court to arbitrate.

   Gotani Hara is justified to seek redress.

4. Ha ha ha ha uku nkulira Kwa adzanthu anafedwa ma cadets kkkk musolvenge

5. Another useless speaker who doesn’t understand the basic tenets of the president’s powers and her own job as far as Bill’s are concerned.

6. You people are stretching yourself – from Speaker, Chilima, Chakwera and HRDC. Please, read the constitution.

7. Did Concourt say the president should JUST assent to Bill’s? No. It didn’t because the constitution has a provision which says a president can assent or not assent to Bill’s. So, why is the biased Speaker Gotani going to court for?

8. For once in a history of Malawi we have rubbish in State house

   1. In our history we have a rubbish Speaker who apparently doesn’t know that a president can assent or not assent to Bill’s.

9. I fear Garton Kamchedzera is compromised as an analyst. No objectivity from him anymore. Please let Edge Kanyongoro or other neutral folks provide us better analytics vis a vis the Law. Our reporters please be of help, avoid such analysts.

   I used to attend some lecturers by these folks, especially in the political science department you could see clearly the hatred towards the incumbent. And then later that lecturer is asked to provide his views as an analyst, ooooh munthu ali kale ndi mbali anenanso chani chabwino

   1. In communication or psychology, “People usually CHOOSE WHAT TO HEAR”.

      In any conversation, people will always choose what message they like and discard what speaks negative to their liking. No wonder, the Patriotic is choosing what he like about Kanyongolo comments and rejects Kamchedzera comments. That’s how human beings behave, it’s not a surprise.

      You are free to express your opinions.

      1. People also choose what to speak. But there is also a difference between facts and opinion. The fact which is being hidden by Kamchedzera is that the constitution gives the president powers to assent or NOT to assent to Bill’s which means there is nothing wrong with what president Mutharika did.

      2. Steven in biblical terms ” out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks “. You can not speak it lest it be in you.

   2. Awatu zao ndi zoloweza basi. Kuganiza zero !!!

10. Bravo Cathreen!!!! Go Girl

11. Concourt and or Supreme Court, please listen to the voice of reason which Super Power had initially put forward. Institute Presidential Council by Court order. All this is resolved as the current president does not have mandate to rule in Malawi as there were no elections ans his time expired on 19 May 2019

    1. Concourt and Supreme court cannot do that because the constitution does not provide for that. If they want to lunge this country into bloodshed, let them try it. It is these corrupt and incompetent courts that have put our country in this situation. They gave a flawed judgement and thought they could force the creation of laws but they have failed.

12. That’s the right direction, Munthalika should just resign other wise his supporters will continue to swim in poverty.

13. I have read some of your comments, and most of them are full of ignorance especially accusing the Speaker, if you don’t know anything about laws, it would be better for you just to keep quiet. It is very laughable to see people writing in English in things they don’t know, this is total madness, in simple way, the Speaker has done the best thing by going back to Court, she is not opening another case against your useless President, she is their because the respondent (President)has failed to honour the Court order, since the Court order came from Court, the Court has to give the direction. Umu ndi mmene timachitila munthu akapanda kutsitila COURT order please mbuli inu!

    1. This is the stupid comment I have read here this morning. Constitutionally, how has the president failed to honour the so called court order?
       Osamangooanga comment zinthu ignorantly without knowing what you are saying

       1. Next time, use the simple understanding just like we are all trying to make ourselves feel better, I work in this industry and I know what am talking about unless Ku Malawi High Court doesn’t have Power like any other Courts in the World. The Court ordered the Parliament to go through some other things to see what was needed to be done for the good of the Nation not for any Party. But because Malawians belongs to the Party not to Malawi, that is why understanding of simple thing becomes a virus. The so called cadetship is one that has taken place. By just responding me has really strength me to know that what I have said, is very true. And those who knows legal framework will understand me not Cadets. Sorry, she has gone there! What next?

          1. You see, strengthening your stupidity at its best. Open your eyes and see things with a sober mind. The court order went to the parliament and not to the president. As for the president, he acted according to the powers given by the constitution. Mind you, he hasn’t break any law. Even if the speaker has gone to the court, the judiciary can’t force APM to assent bill otherwise that order woild have gone straight away to the president and not the parliament. Am sorry to say this, you just hate APM as a person but that doesn’t mean that whatever he is doing is wrong

    2. you are the biggest idiot ever. Do you know anything about separation of Power???? MCP yinakuphani kwabasi

    3. @kagalu, did the concourt order the president to give assent to laws it ordered parliament to pass? i don’t think so. And again only the supreme court has overall authority why not wait for its decision.

    4. This is ignorance at it’s exellence for real.why comment on things you don’t understand. The reason why muthalika appealed against the ruling it’s because the court errad in their judgement didn’t follow the Constitution so that judgement is out of the Constitution. So even speak going to court makes no sense what does the Constitution say it’s simple that way osaonetsa umbuli please that speaker is biased and umbuli she’s embarrassing her office. Stop dreaming pipo you LL be shocked the other court judgement.

    5. @ k. Kagalu . The court did not order the president to assent to the bills. The constitution allows him not to and parliament has to reviews the bills. Why has the speaker jumped the gun?
       Finally before you speak about peoples English skills, please re-read your writing. Yours needs some vitamins too.

14. This is a worse speaker Malawi has ever had. She is serving the interest of MCP. I doubt if she even know what it means by “separation of powers” of the three arms of government. Please don’t spoil our constitution because of MCP’s hunger for power. Value our constitution. The bills are in conflict with our constitution, therefore, accept the lawful decision by APM. Your decision is a clear proof of the conspiracy your office, concourt Judges and MCP have to destroy government. MWALEPHERA. Be assured of remaining in opposition up to 2084.

    1. chizungu chabwanji ichi?????

    2. Hahahahaha @madando 147. Tippex unlawful president Peter Mutharika .mec

15. Each arm of government is independent. No arm should bulldoze the other

16. What Gotani should be taking to court is the fact that she was elected in an election administered by Jane Ansah. She should be reminding the court that it was Jane answer that presided over the election of MPs and councillors.

17. I find it annoying to see another woman who has risen to the helm behaving in a foolish way and by doing so destroying her golden opportunity and that of future women leaders just like Joyce Banda did. Gotani should have used her intelligence by openly writing to Concourt judges that, unfortunately the diktats in their 3rd February ruling have failed to be done through democratic processes. She would save this country from the evil fools that are wasting our time and resources on this stupid issue.

18. Gotani is turning herself into an idiot. She needs to read the constitution and understand parliamentary procedures when it comes to bills.

19. Biased Gotani should tell and educate ConCourt and its corrupt judges that their ruling has failed in parliament because MPs who represent the people did not vote for Constitutional change.

20. Gotani Hara,if you read this don’t think it’s a joke. We are tired,enough is enough. You think we are fools. One day you will see.

21. Simbia is another Bulutu who will never understand the the laws of Malawi Until his death probably.

22. This Speaker is only serving the interests of MCP and the best thing is to impeach her. After Presidential elections MPs should raise a motion to fire this speaker of Parliament. Msowoya and Mcheka Chilenje were very professional.

    1. Yakuwawa chifukwa APM zinthu sizikumuyendera. Wabiyanganji vote ??? Uku wayenda wepeyupeyu. He is not thinking right. Old age has catch on him. I feel sorry 😐 for him.

    2. As Jane Ansah is serving the interestof DPP

23. So this fight is between judiciary and administrative arms of govt. The legislature is just a messenger…..shame because I believe it is the duty of legislative arm of govt to make laws which administrative arm of govt should use and judiciary should interpret

24. Chitsiru ichi.Uour support for r mcp will throw you in the drain of manyi

25. Abakha munveno mbebe wa concourt uku supreme manyeresa loading, munya mpheeee

26. Chopitira ku Court ndichaninso, kodi speakeryo, MCP ndi UTM anamudyesela eti
    Khala choncho uwona nyenkhwe posachedwapa

27. I don’t believe in that nosense that the 50+1 is already in the constitution. Those who have been around know too well how public affairs and the maniac Ntambo made noise for the electoral law on 50+1 to be tabled in parliament. I recall Tembenu once presented that bill but it was rejected because it had a clause affecting MPS. AND even recently a private bill was presented on 50+1 but failed to get two thirds. So these so called learned people from Chanco want to convince me that all these efforts were being done yet the 50+1 was already in the constitution. Let us stop fooling each other . What we have in the constitution is simple majority by first past the post and already learned judges in 1999 ruled that the winner is one who amassed more votes than the other. Now the concourt made their ruling based on dictionary meaning not constitutional meaning which was duly minutes during its formulation.

28. Peter is an acting president as it stands so is chilima. The question is, can acting person change the law or is it lawful for an interim to do so? His term expired in may, so is there difference between permanent and temporary position?

    1. There is no such thing as acting president in the Malawi Constitution. Stop reproducing stupid arguments. Mutharika is the president. Muphulika muona.

    2. Join the discussion…kkkkkkkkkkkkkk iwe bulutu ndithudi Chilima wanted to be in power as vice president ,chilima did that for his selfish reasons ,mfana amene uja safuna kukhala munthu wamba amafuna nthawi zonse akhale penapake poti azitchuka ndiye ulendo uno aziona chifukwa ka alliance kawo kaja sikaphula kanthu ,

    3. Acting president? Where did you get this rubbish bulutu?

29. Did I hear on the street the word that start with I in our constitution, The I word that is now everywhere is impeachment.

30. The speaker is a puppet of the concourt judges. The councourt should have considered that Parliament could not have just amended the constitution without due process of voting. The bills failed the test and the concourt should have advised as such.

31. Lesson to concourt judges you don’t force other arms of government to make laws to justify a FAKE JUDGMENT. The president acted within the presidential prerogative laws in Malawi and there is no law on the land that provides remedy to presidential prerogative. A speaker imwani panado muchira.

32. I think mbuli ndinuyo mkunyoza mayi Hara. Mzisiyanisa a court order bill and a normal bill. That was a court order ndipo ndizoveka zimene achita mayi Hara because that order was from the same court.

    1. Nobody is above the Law

33. Ana a dad anagwirizana kuti ayambe kutokota kwabasi pa nyasa times ingakhale ngati zibekete zosokosa…

34. madam speaker. what if the supreme court nullified the whole elections results after the constitution court find Jane ansah incompetent?

35. A biased referee doing her best……

36. Does the Parliament report to the concourt? Misalatu iyi munthu wamayi Gotani.

    Did Gotani think she was clever by amending the PPE ACT to accommodate a rerun when in fact the constitution had not been amended to accommodate 50+1? Amayi mwagwa nayo. Our constitution is still intact and there is nothing like 50+1 anywhere in the constitution. Thanks APM for standing vigilant in protecting our constitutional order.

    UTMCP kuti leeeewuuu dishaaa kudzagwa chagada pamenepaja kkkkk

    Bwana APM ulemu wanu.

    UDF-DPP Booomaaa!

37. Gotani Hara wachepa nazo kodi ungalimbane ndi mizwanya ya malamulo???? Achina Jane Ansah SC judge wa ku Court of Appeal mapeto a ma court onse kuno ku Malawi ndiye iwe ukuti chiani. Tamvetsera zija mumachita mu nyumba yanu yamalamulo zilingati masanje – phada and ambilife tinasiya kumamvetsera ziphwisi zanuzo chifukwa palibe chamzeru chomwe timachiona apart from phokoso, magemu, malikweru, stupit things from big people like you ati ma MPs – Lero mukuti tikupanga malamulo atsopano oyendesera zisankho za Presidenti shaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!! mukufuna muyendetse dziko ngati banki mkonde etiii???? kkkkkkkkkkk!!!!!!! Kodi Yona ndi Absalomu ulendo uja wopita ku State house uja sanafike??? Kukhala ngati asokera achita chidima sakuona bwino bwino ndiye akufuna a court awaunikile njira yopita ku State House – tsoka ndiilo a court nawanso akuchita ku googula pa internet kkkkkk!!!!!!!!!

38. These ppo awonekera pa mbalambanda they wanted to rape the constitution but have failed. The bottom line is the petitioners did not went to court and complain about the issue of majority No! neither did they petition the court to fire MEC officials! What they went there for was issue about irregularities and thereafter ask the court to nullify the presidential elections. So the concourt would have based their judgement solely on issues presented before him and not otherwise. 50 + 1 % issue is offside and also asking Parliament to check the competency about MEC officials thats ridiculous bcoz there is no condition whatsoever that qualifies one to be dismissed on the grounds of incompetency. If somebody is incompetent what is done is find out what made him/her fail to deliver? Is it lack of materials, mere neglegence and so forth. after establishing all that then you ask how do we improve his/her competency that’s why there are issues of refresher course, training, workshops, etc as measures to deal with that problem. So The areas were identified by court why cant we say we need to remind you about your role in this aspect and that? that’s it. A phungu athu womwewo bwanji amakana issue of incompetency kuti tiwayitanitse thru section 64 of the constitution si awa pano anayikhalira akuti tisamawayitane bcoz they know most of them are incompetent thats why timangodzawagwetsa in the next elections. Ma MP musatifinye mwamva a speaker inu inu si uja mukapanda declare one crossing the floor siwomwewo ma MP amathamanga ku court katenga injunction bwanji inu a speaker simubwerera ku court and say mwandiphwanyira ufulu since you have undermined my authority kudziwa kuti zanu zimmodzi.

    1. If MEC had declared Chakwera as winner they should have been praised as being competent. But since its APM then MEC is not competent. This stupid thinking prevails because MEC run three elections and just because Chakwera is a beneficiary of the others parts of the elections then MEC was competent. Again what is the ugly Mary Nkosi doing at MEC. Last time she was disowning her fellow commissioners

39. I think our thinking capacity is compromised.Someone has appealed , instead of waiting you force him to sign for the same things he has appealed for.If he signs is that not accepting the first verdict?Hurry hurry is not a speed!!.

    1. he is confusing himself on the other hand DPP is cofusing him, he is fighting against the Law and the will of people. since every thing is in the hands of the court, they will tell us what is next

       1. Oliver the President is not confussed, he is following the law.

          It is people who want to use law of the jungle who are panicking

       2. Gotan Hara she is not the speaker of the national assembly. She is the speaker of MCP and UTM parties. She must know that the same law that allows the president to sign, it also allows the president not to sign. Under which law did she use to take the bills to the president for signing in the first place and not to the court? She is the fake speaker if not illegal speaker of our house of assembly

          1. Yes the dull-witted Speaker Malawi has ever had in its time

    2. With much respect to the speaker, i fail to understand why she has referred the matter to court. There is no Law in Malawi constitution which gives mandate to courts to instruct parliament which Laws to enact and which ones not to enact.

       Laws in Malawi have to be enacted by following the procedure. As a speaker, her duty is not to water down the procedure for enactment of Laws under the disguise that the court recommended or instructed the Parliament to enact such such a law.

       Courts to do not have legal powers to instruct parliament to enact specific Laws. There is a difference between recommendation and an order. Courts can recommend but they can not order parliament to enact a particular Law. This is what is meant by real separation of powers as pointed out by the speaker herself.

       If parliament starts showing this weakness by requesting the courts on enactment of Laws, this will simply indicate surrendering of Parliamentary powers to the Courts. The essence of parliament will be in jeopardy. Though the courts have Locus Standi on enactment of laws, that does not mean instructing parliament on enactment of specific Laws. Laws must be enacted in accordance with the constitution.

       The speaker needs to address the reasons why the president has rejected to assent those bills.

       If parliament starts surrendering its powers to courts, the courts will seize that opportunity and in the long run the parliament will eventually diminish its powers. Enactment of Laws is purely duty of parliament and not courts,

       i put this question to the speaker; What does she understand by appealing a cause to a higher court. The rule of Law allows an person or organisation to appeal This is democracy.

       In America just one example, the president can veto a bill. But both houses of congress and senate house can override those powers if both houses vote by 2/3 super majority.

40. People should now realise that ConCourt judgement is flawed. The corrupt and incompetent judges failed to understand constitutional provisions but also the fact that it is foolish to make a ruling that depends on politics i.e. voting in parliament. Parliament is sovereign and the constitutional amendment that the judges ruled on was defeated. SHAME on our corrupt judges.

    1. My friend if you have evidence of corruption why are you not reporting to ACB than just talking things that make no sense here, you comment to politics issues as if you are in soccer. speak facts not rubbish on this public forum. Please tell us where it went wrong with evidence

       1. Evidence is the flawed judgement they enacted. I doubt if these judges are conversant with our constitution or else if they did, their judgement could not have been in conflict with the constitution.

    2. It’s not flawed. Only that Peter wants to maintain power by all means

       1. Concourt judgement is flawed. A judgement should always stand on its two legs. Any judgement that depends on creation of laws is completely flawed because the process of law-making is democratic. It involves debate and voting. Courts cannot control this process. What don’t you understand?

       2. Flawed to the rotten core

    3. We’ll see what the outcome will be like soon Bulanka.

41. Gotani failed to change the constitution and then went ahead to amend the PPE Act.

    1. Nothing sensible in what you’re saying as it’s confusionist

       1. That’s exactly what happened. Trigger your brain to see the sense.

42. Wagwa nayo Gotani. She is accepting that she can no longer pass illegal and unconstitutional bills in parliament.

    1. Understand the topics and deeply think before posting as people will laugh at you.
       It’s not Gotani’s issue but concerted view mind you

       1. She must follow parliamentary procedure and not views from the environment

43. Gotani is an illegal MP and Speaker if we are to sustain the stupid idea that Ansah mismanaged last year’s poll. If indeed, Jane Ansah did not perform, then the courts should have all last year’s polls -presidential, parliamentary and council should be annulled.

    1. very sure

44. President Mutharika acted within his constitutional powers. It appears MCP and UTM have seen that they cannot stand the rigour of political processes.

    1. Just wait soon you’ll be 🤧

       1. We will challenge any move that will undermine Parliament.

45. Gotani ukuopa chiani? You failed to change the constitution and rushed illegal bills.

    1. Phweeeeeeee 🦆

    2. She is a puppet of MCP/UTM.

46. God bless you mayi Hara!

47. Kodi coronavirus itha liti? Tigwire ntchito ife.

48. A speaker awa nzeru alibe. You mean she does not know what happens next if a bill is rejected. Kodi ntchito ya clerk of Parliament nchani if not kuphuzitsa mbuli tinaziyika ku pa parliament

    1. Khalani chete. Game simukuyiwelenga.

    2. You must be insane because u doesn’t know what u r saying

    3. Don’t forget Clerk of parliament is from Thyolo and was approved by APM against a more competent person recommended by PAC

       1. She is from Mchinji, get your facts right.

    4. Oooooooh phweeeeeeee 🦆

    5. Kodi munthu ukakhala robot pamakhalanso nzeru?

49. nakhanyanga uyu mchonayu asatitaise nthawi ai.
    pano wagundika mobilizing anthu kuti ana akhanda azikalembetsa nao zao ziphaso for k5000.00 kulandila makolo. idiot.

    no wonder you fired all good civil servants omwe amakana kumangosainila ma agenda opanda mitu. tikuululani muone.
    paja mwati minister wa local government ndi ndaniyo?????
    mwabisala pa tsekela munya anamacende ini

50. magogo zaka 90 koma kakaka pa zinthu zosapititsa dzilo patsogolo

    1. Zaka siziwerengedwa pa udindo uwu. Ronald Reagan analowa ndi zaka 78 mmene pa udindo wa u pulezidenti Ku America. Pano Biden ali 76 ndipo Sanders ali 77. Anganga anu aja che Kamuzu anayimiranso MCP mu 1994 ali ndi zaka 88; timachita choguza Kuti akavote. Those are just the few examples.

Comments are closed.