Trust and institutions in Malawi

As we approach the general elections we are reminded of the fragility of our institutions which since their establishment in 1994 have weathered extreme testing. However the fundamental problem is not with our formal institutions but with our “political class”. No democracy relies entirely on the formal institutions of governance. Non-formal institutions matter. These include “gentlemen’s agreements” (to use an obviously gendered notion), norms, parliamentary traditions and basic trust. In the absence of these we have resorted to injunctions. Take the case of trust. For much of the last five years our politics has been mareked by deep mistrust among the political class. The cat and mouse games over the budget are a good reminder that we have a long way to go before creating a truly democratic political culture. The government has been afraid that the opposition will use its numerical strength following the expulsion of those who had crossed the floor to initiate impeachment proceedings. The opposition, in its turn, feared that once the budget was passed the government would chose to adjourn the parliament until further notice. And in some way the opposition's fear seemed vindicated renegade on promises to take up the Section 65 issue after the budget had been passed. Neither of these fears may have been justified but where there is mistrust they pose serious barriers to dialogue. The stability of formal institutions does not depend only on their mere existence, constitional legality or internal coherence but also on the self-restraint exercised by those using them.

We are already seeing how the injunctions mania is eroding the credidility and integrity of the judiciary.