Follow by Email

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

(Dis)Functioning State of Malawi


Is Malawi now a country without a justice system?  So asks a recent post from the OSISA blog by Richard Lee. He opens his post with the following:

“The old adage that justice delayed is justice denied has never been more pertinent in Malawi – as the whole arm of government that helps citizens to access justice has not been functioning for the past two months. The reason – critical support staff are on strike in order to force the government to review their conditions of service. So apart from the occasional judicial order – such as recent rulings to release Ralph Kasambara on bail – only two arms of government are really operational – the legislature and the executive”

Previously the background to the judicial strike was covered on this blog by Ruth here 

Now after almost fully ignoring the breakdown in the justice system for months the government has this week taken the very unusual (and probably costly) step of publishing letters of correspondence between themselves and the judiciary over a number of years in National newspapers to highlight how they are not bound to the agreement reached in 2006 with judicial workers. In Monday’s Daily Times there was over five full pages of such letters and minutes from meetings between the parties. In these statements the government has claimed that the approved conditions of service are not valid, as the Ministry of Finance was not fully consulted on the conditions which is against the provisions of the Public Finance Management Act, 2003. Given the matter was litigated in Constitutional Case No. 6 of 2006, where the High Court held that the executive should implement the revised conditions and terms of service it is a difficult argument to make and is confusing as to why the government did not make such an argument at that time or appeal the High Court ruling. Given the ruling the executive is ignoring the structure of the constitutional processes and disregarding the rule of law.  Quite simply the government cannot afford to implement the revised conditions and agreed to them at a time when the Presidents D.P.P part were in a minority led government with shaky control over the legislature. Finance Minister Ken Lipenga has stated that it would require the Treasury to find MK2 billion to backdate payments to 2006 and given international donor support has left the government with a serious shortage of funds to meet its budget, additional payment to the judiciary do not rank high on the priorities of this executive.

In addition the very vocal Office of the President and Cabinet has been issuing threatening remarks to the strikers claiming that the strike is illegal and they must return to work.  This is unfortunately yet another example of the executive making inappropriate pronouncements against those who they view as a threat to the system. However the striking workers are claiming they will now never return until their demands are met. However outside of the he says/she says going on between the government and the striking workers there has been almost no recognition in the media of how this strike is effecting the men in women currently detained in Malawian prisons and police stations and the serious human rights and constitutional violations that are being committed upon them on a daily basis. Unlike most aspects of almost anything that happens in Malawi the president has not made any comments about the strike personally. However he has not always been a fan of the judiciary in the past claiming that they tend to rule against his government. In an interesting piece of legislation passed last year his administration passed a bill, which denies citizens the right to apply for an ex-parte injunction against the government and public officers, which is almost certainly going to be found unconstitutional when challenged.

Sometimes numbers speak louder than words and currently those detained in Lilongwe are experiencing severe over crowded conditions. In Maula prison, the adult prison in Lilongwe, when IRLI first stated to collect statistics in October 2011 there were 481 persons being held on remand before trial. 70 of those were on expired warrants (that is excluding homicide cases where the statistics are separately kept as most of the homicide remandees are kept severely over the permitted custody limit). On February 23rd 2012 there were 666 remandees with 457 expired warrants. That is 457 people, outside of homicide remandees, who are being held in unlawful detention in one prison.

The Lilongwe police station is similarly over crowded. The cells in the station are built for about 100 detainees and on the 29th February they had 164 people in custody. Those being held in police custody are not fed and depend on the kindness of family or police officers to eat. Due to the massive influx of new detainees some suspects are being sent to prisons, despite not appearing before a court of law. Under the Constutution of Malawi a person charged with a criminal offence must be brought to court within 48 hours. Before the strike began law enforcement officials were increasingly unable or unwilling to comply with the provisions of the Criminal Prosecution and Evidence Code (CPEC)  which states that as soon as it is reasonably possible and not later than 48 hours after the arrest suspects must be charged or informed of the reason for their continued detention, failing which they should be released.  The 48 hour rule was not always adhered to in practice because of the lack of resources available to the Police to enable them to take suspects or arrested persons to courts of law in time.  Section 42 of the Constitution also states that every person who is detained shall have the right:

(a) to be informed of the reason for his or her detention promptly and in a language he understands
(b) to be detained under conditions consistent with human dignity…
(c) consult confidentially with a legal practitioner, be informed of his or her right promptly and where the interests of justice so require, be provided with the services of a legal practitioner by the State.
(d) to be given means and opportunity to communicate with and be visited by his/her spouse, partner, next of kin …
(e) to challenge the lawfulness of his or her detention in person or through the a legal practitioner before a Court of law
(f) be released if such detention is unlawful

I think it is useful also at this point to highlight the first sections of Part IVA: Section 16 of the CPEC in full:

·      S161 An accused person may be held in lawful custody in relation to an offence while awaiting the commencement of his trial in accordance with this part.

·      S161 B “lawful custody” means that sanctioned by a court order pending trial.

·      S161 C Time shall run upon the expiry of 48 hours after the arrest of an accused person or if the 48 hours expires outside of the ordinary court hours or on a day, which is not a court day, the first court day after such expiry.

·      S161 D sets out that the maximum period that a person accused of an offence triable in the subordinate court may be held in lawful custody pending his committal for trial in relation to that offence shall be 30 days

The 48 hour requirement is so important in a legal system as it affords an opportunity for the detained person to be charged promptly or at least be informed of the reasons for his arrest. It is also an opportunity for the state to continue detaining a suspect with the sanction of the court, thereby ensuring that such detention is lawful. In addition, it offers the court an early opportunity to assess the evidence against a suspect and whether there is any justification whatsoever for continued detention. These are essential safeguards in a democratic state. It is quite evident that since the strike began that flagrant breaches of both the constitution and the CPEC have been ongoing and anybody who has been taken into custody since this time is now being kept in lawful custody. A question arises as well as to how police officers are having persons whom them have arrested commited to prison when they have no judical staff to stamp the commital warrant. The police are required by law to obtain remand papers or committals from the Magistrate’s Court before they send suspects to prison. If magistrates are signing such warrants then they should be correspondingly be signing the release papers for prisoners who have either been granted bail or whose dates of release have passed. In addition questions muct be asked as to how both the police and the defendant in the case of Mr Ralph Kasambara, a prominate critic of the givernment and former Attorney General, were able to have bail and search warrants signed when those who cannot afford to have legal representation have not had the same rights afforded to them.  As Mwaungulu J stated in The Republic vs. Leveleve:

The right under section 42 (2) (b) of the Constitution should be seen as more than a right. Like most rights, it is an ideal. In my judgment it is also a standard, a measure of the efficiency of our criminal justice system. For separation of powers and removal of arbitrariness in the criminal process, the forty-eight hour right ensures prompt judicial control and check on executive actions affecting citizen’s rights. To the citizen, the forty-eight hour right affords the citizen a prompt opportunity to assert and sample rights the Constitution creates for the citizen and test the reasonableness of the state’s deprival of those rights. The framers set forty-eight hours as the efficiency standard for our criminal justice system to bring the citizen under judicial surveillance. In my judgment there are no operational problems.

All accused people also have the right to be tried within a reasonable time. This right is also enshrined in section 42 of the Constitution. The enjoyment of this right does not begin and end with the commencement of the trial but from the moment the accused faces arrest through to the final decision. The State cannot use a lack of resources, and I would argue a strike, as an excuse to violate a detainee’s rights, as was clearly stated by the Malawi High Court:

State organs cannot, however, avoid constitutional duties and responsibilities under the section because of administrative or financial difficulties. The weight a democratic constitution attaches to the citizen’s rights should, in my judgment, be matched with prioritizing desire to attain efficiency levels that uphold and promote rights. Any other approach results in violation of rights

In addition to this a negligible number of detainees have access to legal assistance during their incarceration. Principle 11(1) of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under any Form of Detention or Imprisonment states “a detained person shall have the right to defend himself or to be assisted by counsel as prescribed by law”. Locking people up in without proper warrants, without their being brought before a court of law, in excess of the period of time they are permitted to be held  and without access to a lawyer contravenes the Constitution, which specifically sets out that that every person has the right to personal liberty and dignity.  Section 19 of the Constitution of Malawi states that the dignity of all persons shall be inviolable and that no person shall be subject to torture of any kind or to cruel inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment and each person shall have the right to freedom and security of person which shall include the right not be detained without trial. These rights are being interfered with everyday that the strike continues.

Article 9(5) of the InternationalCovenant on Civil and Political Rights provides that “anyone who has been the victim of unlawful arrest or detention shall have an enforceable right to compensation”, and this provision is applicable to all unlawful or arbitrary arrests and detentions. While it will not resolve the difficulties detainees are facing currently, once the courts resume I can foresee some entrepreneurial lawyers will start seeking out prisoners for unlawful detention test cases which simply cannot be defended given the above set out provisions of the Constitution and which could end up costing the country millions of kwacha in compensation. While trying not to be cynical about the whole situation this will undoubtedly be the first time that many of those prisoners will ever have had any access to a lawyer.

It would be easy to just sit at a computer and dissect the current situation without offering any solutions. However the key question moving forward is what can be done to alleviate the congestion in the interim? Irish Rule of Law International is calling on magistrates and judges to host skeletal court sittings and/or camp courts within the prisons and police stations to alleviate the over crowding and to prevent the widespread abuse of constitutional and human rights which is now endemic in the Malawian system. While its fully admirable that the Law Society, Judges, Magistrates and CSO’s are supporting the striking workers we would maintain they can do so without compromising the rights of the most vulnerable in society. To hold the rights of striking workers above the right to liberty is to put the interests of colleagues above the most vulnerable in society.

In addition we are calling on police officers to grant police bail to those who are alleged to have committed minor offences, which upholds a suspected offenders right to be presumed innocent. The right of a suspect to be presumed innocent is at the heart of a fair criminal justice system. It is one of the principles that influences the treatment an accused person experiences from the investigation to the trial to the final appeal. The right is solidly provided for in international instruments, such as Article 11(1) of the UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 14(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), and Article 7 (1) (b) of the AfricanCharter on Human and Peoples Rights. In addition the granting of bail in Malawi is governed by the Constitution, the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Code (CPEC) and the Bail (Guidelines) Act. The Supreme Court decided in Frederick Mvahe v R. MSCA No 25/2005 that the only consideration when deciding whether to grant bail or not is the interests of justice.  However currently it appears that you can only find justice in Malawi if you have the money to pay for it.

All persons have the right to enjoy respect for their liberty and security. It is manifest that without an effective guarantee of such rights the protection of other individual rights becomes increasingly vulnerable and often illusory.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

International Bar Association Calls for Release of Kasambara

The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBAHRI) calls for the immediate release on bail of Malawian lawyer Ralph Kasambara – former Attorney-General of Malawi and former Commissioner of the Malawi Human Rights Commission. Mr Kasambara has been held in arbitrary detention since 13 February, despite two court orders commanding his release on bail.

Following his arrest last week, Mr Kasambara was granted bail by a magistrate’s court but rearrested several hours later and detained in Zomba maximum security prison. A High Court Judge heard a judicial review application of his case and granted a further order to ensure his immediate release on 17 February. Reports indicate that Mr Kasambara was denied release following ‘specific instructions’ to keep him in detention. Last night Mr Kasambara was moved to a hospital after his health seriously deteriorated due to a lack of access to medication while in detention. He remains under heavy police surveillance at Mwaiwathu hospital.

Sternford Moyo, IBAHRI Co-Chair said: 
‘It is worrying to hear of the arrest and then rearrest of Ralph Kasambara, in clear violation of court orders.’
He added:  
‘The IBAHRI has received indications that other lawyers in Malawi have recently been the target of threats and petrol bomb attacks. This is an extremely worrying trend and represents signs of erosion of the rule of law in the country, as the independence of lawyers and respect for court decisions are threatened.’

Monday, February 20, 2012

MoJCA Criminal Registry

Before

As part of its work with the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, IRLI identified the need to organize the criminal registry. IRLI found that in order to increase work efficiency a case management system is required in the Ministry. This nationwide wide system is something that the EU Democratic Governance Programme is currently working on implementing. As an interim step, IRLI engaged with the paralegals and clerical officers based in the criminal registry in Lilongwe to organize the registry. This work will aid any future implementation of a case management system.




The main focus of IRLI was to build capacity. IRLI together with the paralegals and clerical officer have spent over two months organising the registry. Thanks to the support of senior officers in the Ministry of Justice IRLI was able to work hand in hand with its Ministry of Justice colleagues. Through this capacity building files are now organised by offence, district, year and region.

The benefit of taking this hands on approach means that the staff of the criminal registry have added to the new filing structure and are now trained on how this structure should continue into the future. Taking a combined approach in this manner allows everyone’s input to be incorporated. It also helps instil a best practice and hard work ethic approach to file management which will assist the implementation of future automatic management systems.

IRLI would like to express it thanks to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the staff of the criminal registry and also to the many other officers that supported and welcomed this work. This work has been enjoyable and the participation of all staff is very much appreciation. We look forward to continuing to work together in this manner.

 After

Criminal Registry Staff

  New operations guide

The Judicial strike goes on....

 
The judicial strike in Malawi has now entered it’s second month. All 200 courts, from the Supreme Court to the Magistrate’s Courts have closed causing great disturbance to the efficient running of the legal system having serious consequences for all who seek access to justice. The Malawi Law Society and senior judicial officers have written to the Office of the President and Cabinet (OPC) giving notice they will join the strike should this not be resolved promptly. The Civil Servants Trade Union (CSTU) also says it is likely to join the judiciary workers’ plight.

The current situation has come about due to the refusal of the current regime to implement the terms and conditions as determined for judicial staff by the previous Parliament in 2006. The Executive has refused to implement this despite a High Court judgement from 2007 ordering them to do so. There is a constitutional framework which entrusts particular powers to three respective branches of government – Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. One branch cannot refuse to uphold its obligations as determined by constitutional processes. It was Parliament that determined the terms and conditions of service for the Judiciary and it is the Executive branch that refused to honour Parliament’s determination. The matter was litigated in Constitutional Case No. 6 of 2006, where the Malawi Law Society approached the Court with the issue which heard, among others, that Government should implement the revised conditions and terms of service. The court ordered that the Executive branch of the Government is bound to implement the determinations of Parliament. These were decisions of two of the three branches of the Government and they cannot be ignored by the Executive. To do so is to ignore the workings of the constitutional processes and amounts to disregard of the rule of law.

At issue is a Government promise made almost five years ago to grant a 50% salary increase to judicial support staff which has never been fulfilled. They are also demanding that members of the judicial system be treated in the same manner as other civil servants in that their salaries should be reviewed every year and not every third year and that they must be paid their arrears in wages before they return to work. They have vowed to continue to strike until their demands are met. The workers held a similar strike in 2008 to force the government to implement the pay increase approved by the legislature two years earlier.  But the strike was cancelled three days later after government authorities promised to look into their grievances.  They have been waiting ever since. 
The Government says due to the current financial difficulties any pay increase would be impossible at this time. But the judiciary support staff is not demanding that they be paid what is due all at once. They are seeking part payment and a commitment in writing that they would fully be paid what is due within a given period. While the political crisis in Malawi and the withdrawal of much of its international donor support has left the government with a serious shortage of funds to meet its budget, Parliament’s decision to prioritise the payment of a mid-term gratuity for Members of Parliament has left members of the judicial system angry and strengthened their resolve to continue with the strike.

Any further delay to address the workers’ grievances would have serious repercussions on Malawi citizens, especially those being held in custody. Under the laws of Malawi a person charged with a criminal offence must be brought to court within 48 hours, however without access to the courts this rule cannot be upheld. Crimes are still being committed and people are still being arrested even though the courts are not functioning. Without the courts the police should not send suspects to prison for remand. The remand population in Maula Prison in Lilongwe is now as high as 609 men and women in pre-trial detention where it was 487 remandees this time two months ago. The remand population in Lilongwe police station is at 300 people, all crammed into cells designed for no more than 100 people.  The police are required by law to obtain remand papers or committals from the Magistrate’s Court before they send suspects to prison. This only seems to have been done in one case of late. The Government must address this issue with the urgency it deserves so that the suspects should access justice quickly. 


Justice delayed is justice denied.

Ruth Dowling B.L 

Friday, February 17, 2012

Training Lilongwe Police Officers (Saturday)

 Participants at Saturdays Training Session

On the 3rd and 4th of February the Irish Rule of Law International (Malawi) ran two training sessions at the Lilongwe District Assembly for police officers from Lilongwe Police Station in conjunction with the Department of Justice and Constitutional Affairs and Police Headquarters, Lilongwe. This training session was made possible through the valued assistance of Mr. Pacharo Kayira, Senior Deputy Chief State Advocate in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Affairs and Mr. Happy Mkandawire, Officer in Charge Prosecutions and Legal Services, National Police Headquarters. Mr Kayira and Sam Mbweza from the D.P.Ps office delivered the training in conjunction with Carolann Minnock from IRLI. 


Mr Sam Mbweza (MoJCA) delivering a lecture

Aim

The aim of the training session was to develop a common understanding among all police officers of all the processes that are involved in diversion.

Objectives

Workshop participants should now be able to:

  • Understand the concept of restorative justice and specifically diversion
  • Implement a basic version of diversion in their police station
  • Understand the relevant information that should be taken into account in assessing for diversion
  • Have increased their knowledge of new legislation


In total 38 police officers completed the training event (26 male & 12 female) ranging in rank from S/Superintendant in charge of prosecutions in the central region down to police constables



 

Frontline Defenders: Ralph Kasambara coverage



Front Line Defenders' issued an urgent appeal on the 15th  February 2012 stating that they:
"...believe(s) that the attempted attack against Ralph Kasambara is directly related to his work as a human rights lawyer and his support to civil society organisations. We express deep concern at the attempted raid on his offices and the fact the perpetrators were carrying petrol bombs. These events remind the two arson attacks carried out in August 2011 against the home and office of human rights defenders MacDonald Sembereka and Rafiq Hajat. It is deplorable that no investigation has been opened on the attempted attack"
The organisation followed this up yesterday by expressing concern at the re-arrest of Mr Kasambara and called on the authorities in Malawi to immediately and unconditionally release Ralph Kasmabara as it believes
 "... that his re-arrest is solely motivated by his work in defence of human rights, and to guarantee in all circumstances that all human rights defenders in Malawi are able to carry out their legitimate human rights activities without fear of reprisals and free of all restrictions including judicial harassment"
 Front Line Defenders is the International Foundation for the Protection of Human Rights Defenders founded in Dublin in 2001 with the specific aim of protecting human rights defenders at risk, people who work, non-violently, for any or all of the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Judicial Strike: State v President of the Republic of Malawi

For those who have an interest in the ongoing Judicial Strike, here is the judgment from the 2006 Constitutional case which upheld the Applicants case that once the Malawian National Assembly had determined the terms and conditions of service of the judiciary it became the duty of the executive to implement such determination. Topically Mr Ralph Kasambara appeared for the Applicants in the case

The final words of the court seem relevant to this day: 

"With a little bit of sobriety of thought we doubt whether it would have been necessary to have this matter the subject of litigation"

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Former Malawian Attorney General held in police custody

 Mr Kasambara

On Monday 13th February outspoken lawyer Ralph Kasambara was arrested in Blantyre for allegedly assaulting a number of men. He in turn claims that men arrived at his  legal office, Ralph & Arnold, with the intent to kill him by burning down the office and that he was merely acting in self defence.  Mr Kasambara served as the Attorney General for President wa Mutharika's first term in office and was removed in May 2006. He has been an outspoken critic of the administration since his removal and was a key voice in the July 20th anti-government demonstrations. He is now a member of the Congress of Democrats (Code) political party. Last month he was also summoned by Rodney Jose, the Southern Region Police Commissioner, for allegedly inciting disaffection for the President by supporting the ongoing Judicial strike. 

In an interview from detention, Kasambara said the whole issue was political in nature. “It happened this afternoon when thugs came to my office but we managed to overpower them and later took them to police,” he told Zodiak Radio yesterday.  Blantyre Police publicist Beatrice Mwachande said that Kasambara has not been arrested rather they were discussing with him details of the alleged plot to attack him. There was no comment on whether or not he was free to walk out of the police station at any time.

Information minister Patricia Kaliati today confirmed the arrest of Kasambara and a number of his associates but accused him of kidnapping and assaulting the men in question. It is alleged in today's Maravi post when it was put to her that Mr Kasambara intercepted persons in possession of jerry-cans full of fuel who confessed to being hired to deal with his outspoken criticism of the current executive she replied that no person can take the law into their own hands.There was no comment on the use of self defence.

Since July 20th there have been an increasing number of alleged attacks on vocal community members or leaders of civil society organizations who criticize the president or the executive. There were two arson attacks civil society leaders, Rafiq Hajat and McDonald Sembereka who had had their offices and houses torched by persons who were allegedly DPP members. However dialogue between government and civil society is ongoing after they suspended dialogue mid September  due to the increased violence. The talks are facilitated by the United Nations Under-Secretary-General Sahle-Work Zewde. 

Mr Kasambara had just given a detailed interview to the Weekend Nation calling for the President to be impeached for failing to run the country correctly.


Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Photo Blog: Training Lilongwe Police Officers

 Welcome to training on Diversion and Recent Reforms in the Criminal Justice System

 Senior Deputy Commissioner for Police Central Region opens the training session


 Mr H.K Mkandawire, OIC Prosecutions and Legal Services delivering a welcome speech

 Ruth Dowling and Carolann Minnock, IRLI, Senior Deputy Commissioner for Police Central Region,  Sonya Donnelly, IRLI, Mr Pacharo Kayira, Senior Deputy Chief State Advocate and Mr H.K Mkandawire, OIC Prosecutions and Legal Services

Mr Pacharo Kayira, Senior Deputy Chief State Advocate delivering a presentation on Diversion

Carolann Minnock, IRLI discussing feedback with police officers