If someone asked, which country would you say was a lesson in expanding democracy during the pandemic? To many, the answer is no longer America, “the beacon of democracy,” but few might guess this answer. As authoritarian governments tightened their grip on power around the world, what if I told you that one of the only countries to expand its democracy during the pandemic was Malawi?
In the run-up to Malawi’s 2019 presidential election, incumbent President Peter Mutharika faced an electorate increasingly against him. As Malawians struggled with power cuts, recurring food shortages, and rising costs of living, allegations of bribery and corruption by the Mutharika administration drove thousands of protesters to the streets. Confronted with the possible loss of his power, Mutharika felt as if he had no choice: If he wanted to win the election, he would have to rig it.
As six million Malawians left the polling stations on Election Day, many of them knew something was wrong. Reports of witnessing duplicate submitted forms and missing signatures popped up across the country. Yet the most powerful allegation of corruption concerned the correction fluid Tipp-Ex, which opposition parties claimed was used to alter tally sheets.
By the time the Malawi Electoral Commission announced Mutharika as the winner, 55% of Malawians said that they believed that the election had not been free and fair. Although Mutharika only won 38% of the vote, the simple plurality allowed Mutharika to continue his tenure as president.
At face value, the fledgling democracy of Malawi had fallen. It was easy to write off the country as another victim of the chaotic authoritarianism that has plagued many sub-Saharan countries after gaining their independence from colonial powers in the twentieth century.
Yet, that’s when the protests exploded.
Civil rights groups, opposition parties, and religious leaders led a campaign of protests across the country. They demanded that Jane Ansah, the chairperson of the Malawi Electoral Commission, resign.
“I and many of the people here don’t recognize the legitimacy of this government,” John Phiri, a 25-year-old student, told African Arguments. “There are so many issues that the leaders are failing to address and that is the reason I’ve been taking part in these demonstrations.”
Malawians went from city to city, organizing large-scale marches and small spontaneous demonstrations on an “unprecedented” scale. On inauguration day, Lazarus Chakwera, the runner-up in the 2019 election, led a mass protest to the Constitutional Court in Malawi’s capital city of Lilongwe. The Human Rights Defenders Coalition (HRDC), a network of civil society groups, continued the march all the way into the Capital Hill compound.
Malawians created a bottom-up, people-power movement that ultimately strengthened their case for democracy. In comparison to other countries that have challenged regimes through military coups or elite-driven movements, the people of Malawi delegitimized the authoritarian tactics of Mutharika by demonstrating how out-of-step it was with popular opinion.
This movement was buttressed by opposition parties papering over their differences to build a coalition. Lazarus Chakwera and Saulos Chilima, leaders of the Malawi Congress Party and the United Transformation Movement respectively, appealed the presidential election to the Constitutional Court. They argued that the irregularities of the election rendered the results invalid.
As the Court weighed the evidence, promising to release their verdict in February 2020, Mutharika desperately attempted to clamp down on dissent. Authorities and supporters of the Mutharika administration tried to quell the protests with arbitrary arrests and police violence. Some activists were targeted with machetes, gunfire, and bombs.
Yet, Mutharika and his supporters’ actions are a warning sign to autocrats that anti-democratic crackdowns can fuel the fragility of a regime. It reminds pro-democracy forces that their cause is righteous and their rulers are illegitimate.
A branch of the HRDC tweeted after one activist’s arrest, “Sometimes authoritarian regimes invite trouble upon themselves.” They added a video of the protests continuing undeterred.
On the day the Court was scheduled to release its verdict, the justices were marshaled in with armored cars and military escorts.
Observers were holding their breath. Although the justices had publicly turned down bribes by powerful businessmen aligned with the Mutharika regime, this verdict was a test of judicial independence.
The Court made history as the second court in African history to nullify a presidential election. It condemned the Malawi Electoral Commission for its handling of the election, especially the acceptance of tally sheets that had been tampered with correction fluid. The Court ordered a new election within 150 days.
Most importantly, the Court ruled that presidential candidates must receive a 50 + 1 majority of the vote instead of a simple plurality. This verdict will have long-lasting consequences for Malawian elections.
In the aftermath of the ruling, MEC chair Jane Ansah resigned. The MEC changed its procedures to increase transparency and accountability.
The re-run election was held on June 23rd, 2020. 4.4 million Malawians braved the danger of the pandemic to cast a ballot. The increase in MEC’s credibility led to Africa’s first nonviolent transfer of power following a court-ordered election re-run.
Lazarus Chakwera won with 59% of the vote.
Malawi is a lesson for pro-democracy forces around the world. Not only does it showcase the importance of strong, independent institutions like the judiciary, it also shows the power of the people.
Desperate authoritarians use violence and repression to intimidate their people from fighting back. But Malawians persevered, building a nonviolent civic mass movement that spanned a diverse coalition of groups. According to Freedom House, these are the types of movements that are most likely to lead to peaceful and stable transitions to democracy.
Malawi’s newly elected president Lazarus Chakwera is hopeful that he can take the next step in stabilizing Malawi’s democracy.
“Choosing a government via elections is not enough,” he writes. “Where there is bad governance, elections may bring deliverance, but what Africa needs beyond that is good governance focused on delivery.”
As the global struggle for democracy wages on, may the resilience of the Malawian people become a model for defeating authoritarianism around the world.