Previous 25 / 418 Next

(Name) Clerk 10: (Signature) ....................... ....................... ....................... (Name) (Signature) Names of Political Party Representatives present: .......................................................................................... Names and affiliation of Local Monitors: .......................................................................................... Names of International Observers present: .......................................................................................... 51. As earlier discussed, the requirements under Form VI, in so far as they have not been specifically provided for in the PPEA, are specifically prescribed by relevant regulations under the Act as having the force of law. 52. According to Section 90 of the PPEA: “At the close of the poll at any polling station, the presiding officer shall proceed by first collecting together and separately all unused ballot papers and placing them in a separate envelope provided to him for the purpose and then sealing the envelope and initialling or stamping it over the sealed area.” 53. Further, Section 91 of the PPEA provides in this regard, that: “For the purposes of determining the results of the elections at a polling station and, in particular, in counting the votes thereat, the votes cast at a polling station shall be separately classified into— (a) null and void votes; (b) votes for each of the candidates for election as members of Parliament; (c) votes for each of the candidates for election to the office of the President.” 25

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Chilima v. Mutharika (lower court decision)

Judgment

Question Presented: Whether the Electoral Commission breach its duty under section 76, 77, and 40 of the Constitution of Malawi. These duties include ensuring the absence of electoral irregularities, illegalities, and failed provide proper oversight and verification.

Alleged Acts: During the May 2019 election Presidential candidate Mutharika obtained 38.57% of the vote, Chilima obtained 20.24%, and Chakwera obtained 35.41% of the vote. No single individual one over 50% of the vote. The petitioners allege that the election winner must have ascertained over 50% of the vote.

Procedural history: The court consolidated two complaints and referred the case to the Chief Justice. In a previous decision entitled Chakuamba, the court determined that a majority requirement was satisfied by a first-past-the-post system.

Summary: The court determined that the precedent from the Chakuamba case failed to rely on facts or precedent. Accordingly, the court modified this standard and determined that the majority meant 50% or more of the vote in compliance with the rest of the Malawi constitution. The court further looked to the Black's Law Dictionary definition for majority and determined that the first-past-the-post system was inconsistent with the term majority as set forth.

Conclusion: The President of Malawi was not duly elected and the new election must be held in accordance with the PPEA. The May 2019 election is declared nullified. In order to ascertain the presidency, the candidate must have more than 50% of the vote, rather than the previous plurality requirement.

Legal Issue(s)

Disputing Results
Electoral Integrity
EMB Operation

Applicable Law(s): Malawi Const. 41, 43, 67, 80.

Region: Africa

Country: Malawi

Language of Decision

English

Court: Supreme Court

Election Type: Presidential

Date of decision: Feb 3, 2020

Geolocation

Latitude: -13.993019080150052

Longitude: 33.750713444775464

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

Chilima v. Mutharika.pdf
English
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Chilima v. Mutharika (lower court decision)

Primary Documents

Notifications