WHY THE PRESIDENT WON’T SAVE YOU

The second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic is hitting and, it is hitting hard. Away from home, and close to home. More than ever, we are beginning to realize the reality and seriousness of the problem at hand.

Unlike before when it was thought that COVID-19 was a fuss due to the low number of fatalities, the second wave is challenging this shaky conception. The reality is, we have a pandemic, and it is not a fake pandemic, it is a real pandemic that is claiming lives. Lives of citizens of our country, and lives of distinguished leaders, mothers, fathers, professionals, siblings and friends.

But in the midst of all this, there is evident discontent with the way the government is managing the crisis. Things you will have come across are as follows; we have no president, APM was better there were less fatalities, President Chakwera is just good at speaking good English he won’t take us anywhere, the government is clueless….can you add more? 

If you are reading this I assume you must also have come across the conspiracy theorists.  Those who argue that COVID-19 is being used as front room to get money from donors, and that actually in the backroom COVID-19 is inexistent.  

Others have even gone far to state that you actually get the virus from the “test kit” because China (which produces most of COVID-19 related supplies) is embedding the virus in some test kits so that it makes money and overtakes the USA as the world’s richest economy!

Cut that chaff!

The background provided above is intended to save one purpose and only one. People will talk, and will always talk really good! 

I have a simple task before me.

I argue that the president will not save anyone of us! He is actually incapable of saving us. All expectations of this nature are delusional and based on the expectations of the centrality of law (which is the tool the president mostly uses to offer executive leadership) to regulate and manage the socio aspects of the pandemic in a bid to curb its spread. This is a flawed expectation, without proper control parameters and incapable of logical sustenance.

Second I argue that empirically,  in countries where the government had/has adopted proactive and stringent measures, the virus has penetrated and left its mark. This I reckon comes from the inherent nature of a pandemic and why it is properly so called. Therefore, the requirement that everyone performs their responsibilities in a bid to reduce the spread of the Corona Virus cannot be delegated. 

I then offer conclusions that as much as finger pointing won’t save us, the president will also not save us, not even the most excellent of all. My position ultimately is that everyone should do their part in order to reduce the number of the infections currently rising.

The president offers executive leadership to the country as entrusted by all of us through universal suffrage. Under Section 88 of the Constitution of the Republic of Malawi, the president is entrusted with executive leadership of the country. He is to do this in accordance with the laws of the country.

However as much as the President is given this mandate, there are variables and factors that impact on the President's exercise of this power, more so in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic. These include availability of funds to support health initiatives, decades long corruption impacting on enforcement, procurement and service delivery in the public sector and the depressing low income levels of Malawians who live below the poverty line of MK1, 472.50 per day.  All these, I proceed to argue, may affect any attempts to exercise stringent measures to curb the spread of the virus.

The truth remains, our legal regime is one of the best regimes in the world. The challenge comes in when the law meets reality. As presented above, it would appear therefore that it would be difficult to employ measures such as lockdowns in a country whose population lives on a hand to mouth basis. Does the government have the resources to distribute necessities that the majority of the population would require if stringent restrictions were imposed? Certainly not.

However, it is also to be observed that we are coming from and are in a position in which the government (has) employed moderate measures such as regulations for the mandatory use of face masks at all times, social distancing guidelines…in public transport and other places. However, what is common observation now is that we continue gazetting laws that we can’t enforce. This perpetuates a culture of recklessness  and complacency in terms of regard to law adherence. Better stay idle that legislate.

I opine that the leadership has to do more in terms of enforcement. People do not like the law and will not obey it in most circumstances without the fear of sanctions. The time for excuses is long gone. Any failures in this regard have far reaching effects, on peoples lives and political careers of others. 

It is not uncommon to see a minibus that is designated to carry eight persons under the regulations carrying double the capacity. What is also shocking is that when minibus operators demonstrated recently to have the ban lifted, the government bent to the request. I had remarked to a colleague that this was highly deplorable and shocking in the much touted Tonse Philosophy.

Therefore, when people say the president is not helping, they mean the president is allowing business to continue as usual. The citizen must not have more power than the law, and above law, the government should not make laws it cannot enforce.

In conclusion I reckon that indeed the president has the power to make tough decisions to curb the spread of the corona virus, yes the legal framework is there…but should the president make these calls disregarding social realities on the ground? I answer this question in the negative. Further that the enforcement mechanism of the regulations that the new government came up with is highly deplorable. Now that we have evidence that the regulations cannot be enforced, what is the president doing about it? Is he going to wait for a miracle or he is going to make a tough call to reverse this complacency on the part of law enforcement agencies. The sooner the better.

My second argument is that we should all understand that COVID-19 is a pandemic. In a virtual press conference in May 2009 on the influenza pandemic, Dr. Keiji Fukuda, Assistant Director-General ad interim for Health Security and Environment, WHO said "An easy way to think about pandemic … is to say: a pandemic is a global outbreak". As a global pandemic, and informed by globalisation and the information world, it is important that we have recourse to other jurisdictions in our understanding of the Covid-19 outbreak. This will help us in understanding how other countries have dealt with the problem.

In Italy for example in a study reported by the Lancet Project, it was seen that lockdowns were at first ineffective to curb the spread of the virus. However the number of cases began to drop significantly as human contact was reduced.

Close to home in South Africa, there are mixed results with regards to lockdowns. Enforcement has been difficult and the toll on the economy significant. However, the take away point is that in that country they made regulations and are working hard to enforce those regulations. As a matter of contrast, we cannot be seen to be working hard at enforcing the regulations that we came up with. Go to Senti, Chibavi or Mpondabwino, the scenes are shocking. 

Whilst others continue advocating for a lockdown or other movement control measures, we should be cognisant of the social realities as argued above. In my position, I advocate for strategies that are unique to Malawi. However, in this regard we have not been helped much by medical researchers and policy makers. It appears most of our decision making in this area is based on convenience and corporate governance than medical management.

By way of suggestion, I opine that the President constitutes a research team to make use of the data collected thus far. Can we deduce potential patterns on how the infections were contracted, contact tracing…, can we draw out any patterns? Can we make use of such patterns for our locality? It appears the focus is largely on schools and churches as well as public gatherings, how about markets where we send our maids to get vegetables?…do we have evidence linking the cases to these places? As much as there is a flaw in this reasoning and potential holes (being uneducated in this area myself), the argument is that apart from recording cases, and fatalities…we ought to use data that will inform our decision making in a more localised sense. We can do more.

In conclusion, as argued above, the approach to the Covid-19 pandemic requires concerted actions. It is not a one man show and we cannot bank our hopes on a single head. However, I also acknowledge the role that the leadership can play in curbing the spread of the virus. For example, I suggest proactive approaches in the management of the whole pandemic. Having made regulations, we expect to see a leader who is so dedicated to see the regulations made under his leadership enforced. 

We cannot and should not continue to wait for miracles. This is the reality and we must face it with lion hearted approaches. I have also argued that due to our social realities, strict approaches to the management of the Covid-19 pandemic may not be the most appropriate. In this regard, it requires the responsibility of each one of us to join hands in this fight. Are you going to criticise the president when you can’t wear your mask in public for five minutes? The question each one of us must ask themselves therefore, is what you are bringing to the table in this fight.

The president won't serve you, but yourself. Mask up, observe the distance and most importantly, don't go out if it's not necessary. 

From Chirunga, at the foot of Zomba Mountain, with care.