Legal Experts Slam Marginalisation of Vice-Presidents, Call Practice ‘Morally Wrong’ and a Waste of Public Resources

Malawi's legal and political landscape is grappling with a contentious issue: the persistent marginalisation of the Vice-President. Despite the Constitution establishing the office as a critical pillar of governance and succession, a growing chorus of legal experts and political analysts argues that the practice of consistently bypassing the Vice-President in favour of Cabinet ministers raises serious moral, constitutional, and governance concerns. While the President retains constitutional authority to delegate duties, critics contend that the systematic sidelining undermines the dignity and effectiveness of the Vice-Presidency, leading to a perceived waste of public resources and eroding public confidence in executive leadership. This article delves into the constitutional framework, expert interpretations, and the broader implications of this practice for Malawi's democratic accountability and public finance management.

A significant debate has emerged within Malawi's legal and political circles concerning the perceived marginalisation of the Vice-President. Legal scholars and political analysts are increasingly vocal in their criticism, arguing that while the Constitution grants the President powers of delegation, the consistent bypassing of the Vice-President in favour of Cabinet ministers is not merely a matter of political discretion but a practice fraught with serious moral, constitutional, and governance implications. This issue has gained prominence amid observations of Cabinet ministers frequently representing the President at official functions, even when the Vice-President is available, leading to questions about the utility and respect accorded to the nation's second-highest constitutional office.

The office of the Vice-President in Malawi was established in 1994, during the country's transition from a single-party dictatorial regime to a multiparty democracy. The framers of the Constitution intended for the office to provide balance in governance and serve as a critical component of the executive. Section 79 of the Constitution of Malawi stipulates that there shall be a First Vice-President and, potentially, a Second Vice-President, both of whom "shall assist the President and who shall exercise the powers and perform the functions conferred on the First Vice-President or the Second Vice-President, as the case may be, by this Constitution or by any Act of Parliament and by the President." Furthermore, Section 80(3) mandates that every presidential candidate must declare their First Vice-Presidential running mate at the time of nomination, underscoring the electoral mandate of the office. The Vice-President also holds the crucial role of legal successor and is constitutionally mandated to act as President in cases of presidential incapacity or vacancy.

The core of the current debate lies in the interpretation and application of presidential powers of delegation versus the spirit and intent behind the creation of the Vice-Presidency. Section 89(6) of the Constitution explicitly states that the powers and functions of the President "shall be exercised by him or her personally or by a member of the Cabinet or by a government official to whom the President has delegated such power in writing." This provision grants the President broad legal authority to delegate duties, and constitutional lawyer Bright Theu acknowledges that, from a purely legal standpoint, delegating a minister does not contravene the Constitution. However, Theu draws a crucial distinction between constitutional legality and political convention, arguing that repeatedly choosing ministers over the Vice-President undermines established protocol and sends troubling signals to the public. He notes that while the President has flexibility, the Vice-President does have constitutionally protected responsibilities, such as presiding over Cabinet meetings in the President's temporary absence, which cannot be legally reassigned.

The ongoing marginalisation of the Vice-President in Malawi presents a complex challenge that transcends mere political optics, touching upon fundamental principles of constitutional governance, democratic accountability, and the prudent management of public resources. While the President's power to delegate is constitutionally enshrined, the systematic bypassing of the Vice-President, an office with a direct electoral mandate and a clear role in succession, raises profound questions about the spirit of the Constitution and the health of Malawi's executive branch. Legal practitioners must continue to advocate for a clearer delineation of roles and responsibilities, potentially through constitutional amendments or legislative action, to ensure that the Vice-Presidency is not merely a ceremonial post but an active and respected office contributing meaningfully to national development. The current trajectory risks institutionalising an inefficient and potentially destabilising executive structure, ultimately short-changing the Malawian citizenry who fund and depend on a fully functional government.