National News

ACB report contradicts govt on new law

Listen to this article

While government has rejected the opposition-led motion to change the Corrupt Practices Act (CPA) that sought to give the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) more teeth through independence from the Executive branch of government, Weekend Nation can confirm that the bureau has been pushing for the same amendments since 2013.

According minutes of a presentation to the Legal Affairs Committee of Parliament made by the graft busting body’s top management during a lobbying meeting held at Sunbird Capital hotel in Lilongwe in 2013, the amendments ACB has been pushing for are identical to what is contained in the motion championed on Wednesday by the committee’s chairperson, Peter Chakwantha.

PHOTOGRAPH: NATION ACB report contradicts govt on new law Mera board ought to know and do better PAGE 2 PAGE 3 Mera resolves to divert from PSF for maize The Malawi Energy Regulatory Authority (Mera) board is expected to do much better if it is to efficiently and effectively fulfill its regulatory mandate for the country’s energy sector. Its resolution last month to divert funds from the fuel price stabilization funds levy for the purchase of maize without following proper procedures does not bode well about its adherence to governance issues. The decision is, to say the least, unprofessional and, therefore, uncalled for, given the crucial role the price of fuel plays in the country’s economic development. All the levies in the fuel price build up have a purpose and the board is there to first and foremost ensure they fulfill these roles. The Price Stabilization Fund, for example, is meant to cushion rises in fuel products that would raise inflation. Diverting the fund willy-nilly has serious economic repercussions especially because fuel prices in the county are already very high. Granted, government was pressed to source money to purchase maize to feed the 2.8 million food insecure Malawians. But the shortcut that the board used to source this money raises eyebrows and is a back-stab on government’s commitment to its public finance management reform programme which so crucial to the country now. As some commentators have rightly pointed out, the decision for the Mera board to resolve to divert funds from the PSF, apart from raising transparency and accountability problems, calls for the urgent need to investigate other government parastatals. Without whistle blowers the nation would never have known that Mera had resolved to divert the PSF levy just Malawians do not know how funds in the Drought/Levy were used when the levy was removed in May 2012. n billion to be sent to Admarc for sale in its markets, according to a letter dated 25 February 2016 from Mera to Secretary to Treasury and copied to Chief Secretary, Office of the President and Cabinet and Mera board chair Dingiswayo Jere. Gondwe confirmed on Wednesday that he was aware that the Mera board decided to use money from the PSF to pay for maize purchases for Admarc, but he said his ministry did not authorise the transaction as the decision was illegal and not normal. Under the Public Finance Management Act, government has no mandate to use money without the authorisation of Parliament except in very special cases. Said Gondwe: “The ministry is investigating the matter.” When told that the letter from Mera informed the Secretary to Treasury about the decision as well as asked for his advice on it, Gondwe insisted Treasury did not authorise the payment and that is why they are investigating the issue. Says the letter: “Although the board noticed that the drought/maize levy was abolished in 2012, the board agreed to purchase maize from the Price Stabilisation Fund. “In arriving at the decision, the board recognised that the current drought has affected a lot of Malawians who did not have adequate access to maize stocks.” The board further noted in the letter that the Drought/Maize Levy which would have collected funds for the drought was removed from the pricing structure in May 2012. “The board, therefore, decided that the maize purchase should be funded out of the Price Stabilisation Funds.” The PSF is an account that accumulates funds from fuel sales meant to cushion any rises in fuel products that would raise inflation. Mera board chair Dingiswayo While government has rejected the opposition-led motion to change the Corrupt Practices Act (CPA) that sought to give the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) more teeth through independence from the Executive branch of government, Weekend Nation can confirm that the bureau has been pushing for the same amendments since 2013. According minutes of a presentation to the Legal Affairs Committee of Parliament made by the graft busting body’s top management during a lobbying meeting held at Sunbird Capital hotel in Lilongwe in 2013, the amendments ACB has been pushing for are identical to what is contained in the motion championed on Wednesday by the committee’s chairperson, Peter Chakwantha. According to the presentation, titled Review of the Corrupt Practices Act Review Committee Report, the bureau constituted a committee to review the Act after noting some shortfalls in the implementation of some provisions since its last review in 2004. The taskforce noted that there was need to open up competition for the position of Director General to ensure ACB’s independence. The report recommends that powers of the President be trimmed to allow Parliament to nominate the person to be director or deputy director with the President only confirming the successful candidate. Reads the proposed Section 5(1): “Nominations for appointment to the office of Director General shall be received from the public by way of a public advertisement placed by the Clerk to the National Assembly and the successful candidate shall be forwarded to the President by the Public Appointments Committee in accordance with the requirements of this section. Section 5(2) reads: “The President shall appoint the Director General upon the recommendation of the Public Appointments Committee of Parliament after attending interviews. Section 5(3) says the terms and conditions of the Director General shall be determined by the President.” In an envisaged Section 6(2) of the Act, the bureau also seeks to trim the powers of the President in removing its directors, again, giving powers to Parliament: “The person holding the office of Director General may be removed by the President upon recommendation of the Public Appointments Committee (PAC). In an interview PAGE 3
Ndala: We are still waiting for the ministry

According to the presentation, titled Review of the Corrupt Practices Act Review Committee Report, the bureau constituted a committee to review the Act after noting some shortfalls in the implementation of some provisions since its last review in 2004.

The taskforce noted that there was need to open up competition for the position of Director General to ensure ACB’s independence.

The report recommends that powers of the President be trimmed to allow Parliament to nominate the person to be director or deputy director with the President only confirming the successful candidate.

Reads the proposed Section 5(1): “Nominations for appointment to the office of Director General shall be received from the public by way of a public advertisement placed by the Clerk to the National Assembly and the successful candidate shall be forwarded to the President by the Public Appointments Committee in accordance with the requirements of this section.

Section 5(2) reads: “The President shall appoint the Director General upon the recommendation of the Public Appointments Committee of Parliament after attending interviews. Section 5(3) says the terms and conditions of the Director General shall be determined by the President.”

In an envisaged Section 6(2) of the Act, the bureau also seeks to trim the powers of the President in removing its directors, again, giving powers to Parliament: “The person holding the office of Director General may be removed by the President upon recommendation of the Public Appointments Committee (PAC).

In an interview Samuel Tembenu refused to comment on the matter in the wake of the revelations, saying government has made its case in Parliament.yesterday, Minister of Justice

“I said what I needed to say yesterday (in Parliament). I don’t need to be repeating myself. ACB does not make laws in this country. They might have fine ideas on how they want to run their organisation, but we make the laws,” said Tembenu.

ACB spokesperson Egrita Ndala said their proposed Bill was still with Ministry of Justice and the bureau was still optimistic it would go to Parliament in the near future.

“We are still waiting for the Ministry of Justice—if you look at the motion—it only touched on one amendment while our proposed Act makes a number of amendments. Our position as far as we are concerned is that the ministry is still working on the proposed new law,” said Ndala.

Apart from the removal and appointment of the directors, the bureau also wants to increase its threshold of cases it can prosecute, more powers to freeze or seize assets, more arrests without warrants from Judiciary, among others.

The motion by the opposition was shot down in the House after some independent MPs voted against it alongside government, a development the opposition described as sad in the fight against corruption.

“This is a sad day for this nation. We have been denied an opportunity to uproot corruption. Nonetheless, we are not defeated and must fight on. There is a need to change the minds on the part of those who campaigned to have separation of powers and are now behaving like chameleons shooting down the very things they vowed to do,” said MCP president and leader of opposition, Lazarus Chakwera. n

Related Articles

3 Comments

  1. Parliamentary should work with ACB and help it become more independent. I like the proposed amendment as requested by ACB.

  2. Bambo Tembenu tsopano! The Senior Counsel himself defending the interests of a few selfish individuals at the expense of the national good!

  3. Tembenu is not a good minister. He is too partisan. MPs should wait until DPP goes out of office and then bring back the amendments.
    Malawians should not hope DPP will do this country any good.

Back to top button
Translate »