Presentation Outline

1. INTERPRETING AND SETTING THE POLITICO-LEGAL FOR TRADITIONAL LEADERS IN AFRICA - THE CASE OF MALAWIUniversity of VeronaSeminar Series04 November 2018

2. Presentation Outline • Background • Traditional Chiefs –Laws and Policies • Traditional Chiefs – perceptions of people in Democratic Era • Conclusions

3. Scramble for Africa

4. Background – Evolution of Traditional Leadership in Africa • Following colonisation, immediate question was how best to govern African territories and legitimise colonialism. • Two possibilities available: • tradition of self-government as had evolved in white settler colonies of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. • tradition of autocratic governments which had developed in India and other Crown colonies. • In the case of British (and to a large extent other colonial powers), tradition of autocratic governments adopted • Why autocratic governments? • Extractive • Foreign / new institutions

5. Direct Rule • Need to create a bureaucracy of paid officials similar to ancien regime in Europe. French, rois de la brousse or kings of the bush. • These were all purpose local administrators and had a strong military character. • Need to abolish or ignore traditional rulers and institutions • Use of English/French as languages of government and education • Problem: few Europeans on the ground and with limited resources difficult to govern territories.

6. Indirect Rule • Idea developed in the 1920s by applied anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski and Lord Frederick Lugard, British imperialist who had worked in Fiji and northern Nigeria. • Considered better than direct rule which promoted divide and rule and also made Africans caricatures of Europeans. • Sought alliance with traditional rulers and hence ruled indirectly but through unequal relationship. • Preserved indigenous political and social structures • Europeans as supervisors of traditional leaders- hence paternalistic attitude towards Africans • Nyasaland adopted Indirect Rule policy in 1933 (Native Authority Ordinance)

7. Problems with Indirect Rule • Attempts to recognise or create chiefs using ascription, achievement or patronage e.g. warrant chiefs (chiefs appointed by British to rule in areas where they did not belong). Others removed depending on level of subservience e.g. Northern Nigeria, Swaziland, Buganda, Benin in 1916, restoration of the Asantehene in the 1920s (Power, 2013; Woods, 1990) • Excluded Africans who had acquired education or had freed themselves from traditional structures • Chiefs not always loyal to colonial state- played contradictory roles e.g. collaboration/resistance • Love and hate dilemma: exploit fellow Africans while serving interests of colonisers, e.g. forced labour mobilisation

8. Modern Chieftaincy: Research Methodology • Household Survey: Multilayered sampling • Traditional Authority (n=60, randomly selected) • Enumeration Areas (n= 120, randomly selected) • Household Selection (random selection of 10 households per EA, n=1,200) • Respondent selection (random selection of adult respondents from each selected household, alternated by gender, n=1,200) • Traditional Leader survey • Traditional Authority (n=60, randomly selected) • Enumeration Areas (n= 120, randomly selected) • Selection of Village head (Listing of all Village Heads, followed random selection of one Village head, n=117; 3 urban areas with no traditional leader)

9. Malawi-Traditional Leadership in the Modern Times • Governed by Chiefs Act 1967 • The Act stipulates: appointments, promotion, duties • But it is an Act of 1967!!! Why not amend or repeal?

10. Malawi-Traditional Leadership in the Modern Times

11. Appointment of Chiefs • The Chiefs Act mandates the President, under section 4 (1), to appoint as Paramount Chief, Senior Chief or Chief. • the President, at the request of a Chief, may appoint any person to be a Sub- Chief. • where the President considers that the holder of an office of Paramount Chief, Senior Chief, Chief or Sub- Chief is unable to fulfill the functions of his office satisfactorily due to age, infirmity or any other reason, he may appoint such other person to act in that office as he may think fit

12. Installation of Chiefs

13. Functions of Chiefs – Section 7 of Chiefs Act A Chief is charged with the responsibility of: • preservation of public peace • carrying out the traditional functions of the office in accordance with customary law • assisting in the collection of tax and general administration of the District • carrying out and enforcing any lawful directions of the District Commissioner.

14. Remuneration of Chiefs • Chiefs entitled to receive remuneration in order to enable them maintain the status and to carry out the functions of his office in a fit and proper manner. • The President is mandated to determine such remuneration from time to time. • President to determine whether and how much should be paid to any Paramount Chief, Senior Chief, Chief or Sub- Chief as pension upon his voluntary retirement or removal from office. • Politics of remuneration (passing of budget in 2007 and salary chiefs)

15. Institutional Arrangement • Chieftaincy is directly under the supervision of the Office of the President and Cabinet and the Minister of Local Government and Rural Development. • This has politicized the institution of the Chieftaincy as Chiefs are always at the mercy of the government of the day. • As such, the procedures for appointing, elevating and removing a Chief calls for a reconsideration. • Chiefs are members of Local Councils (ex-officio)

16. Perceived relevance of traditional leaders in modern Malawi

17. Roles of Traditional Leadership in Malawi • A large majority of Malawians (91%) consider traditional leaders to be relevant in the modern era. • Given the high popularity, it is not surprising that 91% of Malawians hold the view that traditional leaders are very important and should be maintained against 8% who think they should be abolished. • Large majorities consider their traditional leaders to be qualified (82%) while an almost similar number (81%) consider their traditional leaders to be development conscious.

18. Roles of Traditional Leadership in Malawi contd’ • Slightly under a majority (48%) of Malawians consider the most important role of traditional leaders to be mobilizing their subjects for local development projects. • This matches with what traditional leaders themselves say is their most common function. • When it comes to the second most important function of traditional leaders, there is mismatch between what citizens want against the preference of chiefs. • The second function attributed to traditional leaders by ordinary citizens is that of being custodians of culture (17%). On their part, 28% of traditional leaders see their second most important function as representing the views of the people in their village

19. Most important role of traditional leaders (% of categories)

20. Chiefs’ understanding of ‘Serving government of the day’

21. ‘Serving government of the day’

22. Trust Ratings for elected and traditional leaders(% saying trust somewhat or a lot, n=1,200)

23. The most knowledgeable authority about local development (% citing each office)

24. Perception of corruption: (% saying some or all of the officials are involved in corruption)

25. Most influential voices among Malawian villagers(% who say selected authority is influential/very influential)

26. Traditional leaders in party politics? Does your traditional leader belong to a political party? Do you belong to a political party? (Vlg Heads) Among those that say their Village head belongs to a political party, 62% say he/she belongs to ruling party while 38% say they belong to opposition political parties)

27. Dual administration • Almost 4 in five Malawians (79%) support the idea of traditional leaders getting paid for their role in complementing government efforts. This compares to 19% who think traditional leaders do not need to be paid a salary. There are no statistical differences by education, gender, rural-urban locality or age. • Nearly 7 in 10 Malawians approve of the participation of TAs in district council meetings • In terms of decision making, Malawians yet again express confidence in their traditional leaders making sole decisions on development projects compared to elected leaders such as MPs and councillors

28. Attitudes towards payment of salaries to traditional leaders Which of the following statements is closest to your view? Choose Statement 1 or Statement 2: Statement 1: Traditional leaders are independent from government and therefore do not need to be paid a salary Statement 2: Traditional leaders compliment government efforts and therefore deserve to be paid a salary

29. Opinion on the participation of Traditional Leaders in District Council Meetings Qn. Wording: Do you approve or disapprove of the current system of having Traditional Authorities sit as members of the District Council?

30. Who should have authority to select development projects at village level?(% selecting each category) Qn. There are many ways of choosing development projects in the community. In your opinion, which of the following is the best way of selecting projects in your village ?

31. Conclusion • Our results show that most Malawians do not think there is any problem in having traditional leaders work alongside elected political leaders • In fact, traditional leaders are viewed as an important institution in the daily lives of the Malawi public, often more so than elected leaders. • While democratic theory would suggest elected leadership should displace hereditary and unelected institutions, Malawians have greater confidence in traditional leadership compared to elected leaders, and assign to them greater roles, including those that would otherwise be expected to be undertaken by elected leaders. • As a country, we need to harness the reality of dual administration and seek to find ways that can make traditional leaders more responsive and accountable. • Conversely, elected leaders need to learn from their unelected traditional counterparts and seek to nurture the same levels of trust and the confidence of the ordinary citizenry.

32. Thanks for listening