By Paul Madise:
The absence of the Malawi Congress Party (MCP) and Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) from the first edition of the Presidential Debate sparked concern among political experts.
Despite this development, the Task Force remained committed to providing a platform for all candidates to present their visions and policies to the electorate.
Gift Sambo, a political expert, expressed disappointment with the development, stating that the absence of these parties had significantly impacted the morale of the event. “The debate could have been more engaging if both the incumbent and the major challenger were present to face each other. This was what most voters were looking forward to,” he said.
Sambo noted that, in a democratic society, political players had the freedom to choose whether or not to participate in debates.
Forcing them to participate would have been out of order, instead, Sambo advised the organizers to respect the parties’ decisions and move forward, valuing diverse choices and respecting the rights of rational actors to make strategic decisions.
However, Sambo commended players who worked tirelessly to entrench a culture of debate in Malawi’s electoral democracy, emphasizing that such forums were critical in enhancing political accountability. He added that the decision by the two major parties not to participate was retrogressive.
“The decision by the two major parties not to participate in the event was therefore retrogressive. This development suggested that at the elite level, there was little commitment towards the empowerment of institutions meant to facilitate the consolidation of practices and institutions meant to deepen people-centred modes of governance,” he emphasized.
Chimwemwe Tsitsi, a political analyst, shared similar views, stating that the withdrawal showed that political parties hardly saw the benefits of such debates.
“The objectives of the organizers could hardly be achieved without the involvement of the two major contenders. Since these were the two major political parties, it meant the number of people attending physically or following through various media platforms was significantly reduced,” he said.
Both Sambo and Tsitsi described the withdrawal as a missed opportunity for the two parties to demonstrate their commitment to democratic values.
Tsitsi added that the development might have affected smaller parties that missed the opportunity to share their visions with a wider national audience.
“It’s like MCP and DPP denied the other parties a platform to reach out to a lot of Malawians at once with their manifestos and take the two leading contenders to task over their perceived weaknesses,” he added. “The likes of UTM, UDF, and PP might have been greater losers in all this,” he concluded.
Despite this, Tsitsi emphasized that the organizers should have taken this as a lesson to be more considerate of political parties’ viewpoints on modalities and other relevant issues in the organization of debates.
“As organizers, they were indirectly losers for failing to achieve what they initially planned, which somehow rendered the debate as a non-event,” Tsitsi concluded.
