Three Western diplomats—in varying tones—came out to air their thoughts about how the Tonse Alliance administration is handling the corruption fight, in particular the manner in which Capital Hill has been relating with the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), especially its director general Martha Chizuma.

The anti-graft Tsar is facing criminal defamation charges over a viral audio of January 2022 in which she divulged details of an investigation to a third party.

In that leaked audio, she also alleged that some senior administration figures and high-ranking public officers, including a judge and lawyers, were corrupt and thus encumbered her crusade against graft.

Two of the people she purportedly alluded to in the leaked audio—then director of public prosecutions Steven Kayuni and Judge Simeon Mdeza who at the time of the recording was handling a corruption case—felt so injured that they lodged a criminal complaint against her to Police.

The Police in turn charged her with making a statement calculated to lower the authority of a judge and uttering remarks that can prejudice a person against a party to judicial proceedings.

Chizuma was due to appear in court on February 8—last week. Days before her court appearance, the Office of the President and Cabinet suspended her from office, citing public service regulations that officials answering criminal offences be interdicted pending conclusion of their cases in court.

Donors were unhappy with Chizuma’s suspension, sought an audience with President Lazarus Chakwera, which was apparently granted, to express their concerns.

Later, Malawi Law Society (MLS) obtained a court injunction to enable Chizuma to resume her duties. The order also stopped the scheduled court proceedings against the ACB chief.

Government—through the Attorney General—hired private lawyers to file an application in the High Court of Malawi to have the order that MLS obtained lifted. Apparently, it was that move by the State to defend its decision on Chizuma in court that concerned donors, prompting them to come out in the open and speak out.

In the case of United States Ambassador David Young, he starkly berated the Chakwera administration for what he said was the backsliding in the fight against corruption—that they were all talk, but no action.

If the truth were to be told, Young was unnecessarily emotional, particularly in his interview with Zodiak Broadcasting Station, and lacked diplomatic subtlety that would communicate his position without being unnecessary combative or contemptuous of the administration in charge of his host country.

His British counterpart, acting High Commissioner Sophia Willitts-King, writing on Twitter, showed finesse in expressing the concerns and showed remarkable restraint needed in an envoy as did European Union (EU) Ambassador Rune Skinnebach.

The EU envoy, while supporting the US Embassy position in principle by saying the union was “hugely” concerned with the State-Chizuma tussle in an exclusive interview with The Nation on Wednesday, was careful not to be seen to be interfering with Malawi’s justice system.

Carefully, Skinnebach said: “We know there was interdiction, we know it was lifted after Malawi Law Society moved the court, we know that now there is an action going to get this [court order] defended and, therefore, we have to see the outcome before we pronounce ourselves on this.”

My take away here was that the EU envoy said until Malawi’s courts determine the matter, it would be premature to blatantly and publicly take sides. If government is in the wrong, it must be the court making that determination, not anyone else, let alone foreign envoys. Now that is respect for rule of law and I am not sure I can say the same for Ambassador Young.

The point is that there is no doubt that donors are a crucial stakeholder in Malawi’s development process and have for decades been a pivotal bulwark against government excesses and threats to democratic governance, including public finance management slippages; fraud and corruption.

But diplomatic overreach, especially on things as sensitive as corruption fight and rule of law, can be a double edged sword.

A 2021 Global Integrity Anti-Corruption Evidence Project report titled ‘Law Enforcement and High-Level Corruption in Malawi: Learning from Effective Law Enforcement’, authored by University of Edinburgh’s Gerhard Anders, whose work was supported by Britain’s UKAid, says while on one hand donor pressure has spurred government into action, the influence exercised by foreign donor agencies can also be an inhibiting factor.

The report cites Britain and EU, whose financial and technical support, while it has “somewhat fortified the law enforcement agencies”, can also undermine the cohesion of the government apparatus.

“Policies designed and promoted by donor agencies, rather than by the government, lack government ownership. The creation of enclaves by donors can also undermine the coordination with and involvement of other parts of the government,” says Anders.

That said it is incumbent upon the Chakwera administration to find a way of amicably sorting out this mess before it gets out of hand even as they cling to the country’s sovereignty, the independence of its public institutions and of those who work there.  n

The post Careless external pressure can be double-edged sword first appeared on The Nation Online.

The post Careless external pressure can be double-edged sword appeared first on The Nation Online.