Malawi
Part 1, Section 1 of the Act however
states that the law would become effective on a date appointed by the Minister
and published in the gazette. The Minister of Information and Communication
Technology, Nicholas Dausi, was yet
to set a date for the implementation of
the Act as at 31 December 2017, casting doubt on government’s commitment
to the promotion of access to information as indicated in the 2014 ruling DPP
manifesto.
It is important to note that MISA Malawi
made ATI a campaign issue during the
2014 Tripartite Elections and capitalised
on the presidential debates to get commitments from candidates to enact legislation on ATI once in power. The DPP
committed in its manifesto to ensure
that Malawi has ATI legislation. Section
180 of the DPP manifesto reads: “We
recognize that access to information is
a major challenge… In this regard, the
DPP government will pass and implement the Access to Information Bill.”
Although one would argue that the DPP
has lived up to its campaign promise,
MISA Malawi believes that the process
does not end with enactment but effective implementation and enjoyment of
that right by all Malawians. This however, does not seem to be the case looking
at a number of developments in 2017.
Firstly, the oversight body, the Malawi
Human Rights Commission (MHRC),
does not have resources to effectively
undertake its oversight mandate. The
MHRC cannot effectively operate without the necessary support and resources
for effective implementation of the ATI
Act. In the 2017/2018 national budget,
no funds were allocated for preparatory
work that MHRC had to undertake in
readiness of implementation of the law.
More surprising was the fact that during
the Parliamentary Budget Review meet-

ing, the Commission’s budget was cut
to MK166, 000,000 (US$227, 397.27)
from MK185, 000,000 (US$253,424.66).
There is need to support and build the
capacity of the Commission to effectively discharge its duties.
Secondly, the Chapter received several
reports of public bodies and individuals banning the media from covering
public deliberations and functions at the
time the President had assented to the
ATI Act. For example, in mid September
2017, the Chapter received reports that
the Phalombe District Council in southern Malawi had banned reporters from
covering Council proceedings. Just one
month earlier, in August, officials from
the Office of the President and Cabinet
(OPC) had also banned the media from
covering the public-sector reform meetings which were taking place at the Bingu International Conference Centre. On
17 July, MISA Malawi issued a statement
condemning the assault of MBC journalists by prison warders at Maula Central
Prison. The prison warders assaulted
and barred reporter Patrick Dambula
and cameraman Hastings Khombo from
covering a strike the warders had been
holding since 14 July to force government to revise their salaries.
MISA Malawi also issued another statement on 21 July over reports that the
media had been barred from covering
the infamous Maizegate case involving
former Minister of Agriculture George
Chaponda.
Barring reporters from public functions
is unconstitutional and retrogressive
for Malawi and happened at a time the
country had just enacted legislation on
ATI. MISA Malawi believes such developments are an infringement on the
right to know and demonstrate the urgency with which the country needs
implementation of the ATI Act. These

So This is Democracy? 2017

57

Select target paragraph3