It is not public knowledge how Mutharika came to get such an [COMESA]
appointment since he was, at the time of the appointment in 1991,
living in exile, allegedly having fled the Kamuzu Banda dictatorship in
Malawi. One assumes that he would not have been appointed to this
position by a government he had fled into exile from. Unsubstantiated
reports suggest that he had Zambian citizenship at the time and was
given that aapointment under the auspices of the Zambian Government.
Hopefully, one day Mutharika himself will shed light publicly on this.
Suffice it to say that in between his stint at COMESA, a stint which
ended in ignominy for him as explained below, and his appointment to
the Reserve Bank Deputy Governorship by Muluzi, the man who was born
Brightson Webster Ryson Thomu in Thyolo on February 24, 1934, returned
to Malawi and formed his own political party, the United Party [UP].
He contested for the state presidency in the general elections of 1999
under the banner of that party and polled last among all candidates,
garnering less than 1% of total votes cast. Muluzi won re-election to
a second term in that election.
Mutharika received a Masters degree in Economics at Delhi University in
India and a Ph.D award from Pacific Western University in Los Angeles,
United States of America. Pacific Western University has been widely
criticised for being an institution which routinely awards degrees, not
for course or research work done, but in exchange for money.
Nevertheless, Mutharika was able to get a job with the United Nations
in 1978.
Perhaps a substantive glimpse into Mutharika's personality and modus
operandi in a responsible position can be located in a Report of the
Special Committee of Eminent Persons on the operations of COMESA, 1992
To-Date which was presented to the [COMESA] Council of Ministers on
March 4th, 1997, at Lusaka in Zambia. As a result of that report,
Mutharika was fired as COMESA's Secretary General.
Some of the findings of that report are instructive and below is an excerpted version:
1.5.1 (b) The Secretary General has used COMESA funds to finance
missions which cannot be confirmed to be official and beneficial to
COMESA. The Secretary General has also used COMESA resources for
personal activities.
1.5.2 (c) The internal audit, which was the only effective control
instrument has been scrapped by the Secretary General without the
knowledge of the Council; and
(d) The scope of work of the external auditors as evidenced in the
Audit contract has been severely restricted by the Secretary General
contrary to the provisions of the Treaty.
1.5.4 (a) There is no formal organisation structure at the
Secretariat. The absence of a well-thought-out and approved
organisation structure has enabled the Secretary General to:
* abolish some departments and redesign others;
* scrap internal audit of the organisation;
* fill established positions with consultants; and
misplace and misallocate personnel without matching ability with the task to be accomplished
(b ) The relationship between the Secretary General and COMESA
institutions is strained because of the Secretary General's demeanor
and management style. His desire to have a domineering role in the
management of these institutions is one of the causes of the strain.
The Secretary General has, as a result, failed to conclude cooperation
agreements with these institutions as required by the treaty. He has
used funds of some institutions contrary to laid down rules and
regulations of the institution(s)
(C) The Secretary General has failed to develop an effective and
beneficial working relationship with Member States by arrogating
himself a status equivalent to Heads of State and Government thereby
treating Ministers and officials responsible for COMESA Affairs as
inferior to him.
1.5.5 There is no mechanism in place to ensure the effective
implementation of the decisions of the policy organs. Since 1992,
several major decisions remain unimplemented because of the Secretary
General's failure to find time to address the critical areas that need
attention. ..
1.6 Recommendations
At present, the Treaty provisions enable the Secretary General to
report to both the Authority and the Council of Ministers. The dual
reporting relationship has enabled the Secretary General to, not only
ignore, but also bypass the Council on major decisions
There is no formal accounting system incorporating effective internal
controls. As a result, the Secretary General has been able to abuse his
power by misusing resources of the institution .
By limiting external audit to finances from Member States to the
exclusion of other resources available to COMESA, the Secretary General
has effectively curtailed the role of external auditors as spelt out in
the Treaty .
In view of the management style pursued by the Secretary General, his
inability to mould and motivate a dedicated management team, his
fragrant and frequent breaches of the provisions of the Treaty, the
Staff and Financial Rules and Regulations, his misuse of funds and
office and in view of the spite demonstrated to the decisions of the
Council, the breach of the conditions of his compulsory leave, the
Committee recommends that the services of the Secretary General be
terminated forthwith as he lacks vision to take COMESA in the next
century.
In its concluding chapter, the report states (excerpts)
6.1 (a) Observations
… We confirm that administrative and financial management of COMESA
began to deteriorate with the arrival of the incumbent Secretary
General. There is ample evidence of a vibrant institution and a team of
professional and dedicated staff prior to his appointment. The
vibrancy, level of professionalism and dedication have since continued
to wane to the detriment of the aims and objectives of COMESA.
His flagrant refusal to honour invitation to appear before the
Committee and his breach of the conditions set out in a letter sending
him on leave smacks of obstinacy and unparalleled arrogance reminiscent
of his bloated belief that he is at the level of Heads of State and
Government and therefore not subject to the decisions of the Council
whose Ministers he considers inferior to him. It is a mark of contempt
and disrespect to the Committee's appointing authority.
(b) Dr Mutharika avers in his press reports dated 22nd January 1997
that as an appointee of the Authority, the Council has no mandate to
act the way it did, and that he is not subject to the Staff Rules and
Regulations.
We disagree with both propositions. He was appointed by the Authority
as the chief executive officer of COMESA. He is subject to the policy
directions and decisions of the Council in the exercise of its mandate
under Article 9 (2) (a), (c) and (d) of the Treaty. He is bound by the
decisions of the Council in accordance with Articles 9 (3) and 10 (4)
of the Treaty.
(c) We have come across documents and directives which the Secretary
General has issued denying application of the staff rules and
regulations to him. We disagree with this contention and find that
paragraph 4 of his letter of appointment as Secretary General of the
PTA dated 3rd May 1990 expressly subjects him to the Staff Rules and
Regulations of the PTA. We have noted that no letter appointing him as
COMESA Secretary General has been made available to us. In its absence,
we find that the original letter of appointment and his being subject
to COMESA staff rules and regulations are proper and legal (….)
Articles 189 (2) and (4) of the COMESA Treaty which validate
contractual obligations made under PTA as if they were made under
COMESA and specifically provides that:
References to the Preferential Trade Area in any law or document shall
on and after the appointed day be continued as references to the Common
Market. Article 189 (1) of COMESA Treaty defines the appointed day
as the day upon the entry into force of the COMESA Treaty. This was on
8th December 1994. We are satisfied that Dr Mutharika's original letter
of appointment as PTA's Secretary General which subjected him to the
Staff Rules and Regulations of the PTA remains valid and legal in so
far as COMESA is concerned by virtue of Article 189 (2) and (4) as
aforesaid. ………
The Committee has noted glaring instances of mismanagement of the
resources of COMESA by the Secretary General. There is outright misuse
of funds on unproductive, irrelevant and unrelated mission to COMESA's
aims and objectives. To facilitate such misuse, the Secretary General
has dispensed with the internal audit section of the organisation and
emasculated the external audit by illegally restricting its audit
mandate. Substantial funds of the institution have been used to finance
travel, accommodation and other expenses of the Secretary General's
missions. No reports exist to show the net benefit of these missions to
COMESA. On the contrary, evidence exists that the bulk of the missions
are to Malawi (his home) and Zimbabwe where his wife resides on their
farm. COMESA funds these missions, which we have established are
primarily private in nature.
….. We have found that no system of internal controls exists at
COMESA Secretariat. As a result, there are no operations manuals
necessary for the effective financial and budgetary controls. Coupled
with the absence of internal audit and ineffective and restricted
external audit the Secretary General has misused the finances of COMESA
with impunity. He has paid himself questionable expenses, he has given
himself loans and advances, he has failed to retire imprest in time or
at all despite the express provisions of the rules and regulations as
they stand today.
Efficiency in the management and utilization of COMESA resources is
lacking. The emphasis in resource utilization has shifted from COMESA's
core mission of project identification, appraisal and implementation to
production of abstract reports and personal missions of the Secretary
General. The styles of management pursued by the Secretary General in
the absence of a clear development strategy do not lend themselves to
an efficient resource management system.
There is no approved organisation structure for the institution.
Coupled with the dictatorial and intolerant administrative style of the
Secretary General, staff has been frustrated to the point of apathy.
Key professionals have resigned as a result. Staff morale is at the
lowest ebb to the extent that no meaningful work can be expected of
them. Staff rules and regulations have been breached by the Secretary
General with impunity and hefty rewards have been made to those
prepared to tow his line. In addition to the foregoing, the Council
decision restricting the tenure of services of management and
professional staff to a two-year contract subject to a maximum of
twelve years has created a feeling of insecurity among staff. The over
centralization of decision making, authority and financial resource
utilization in the secretary General's office have further compounded
the problems of the institution.
We consider such state of affairs inappropriate for the effective
administration and management of an international organisation.
The relations between COMESA and its institutions, and Member States
are restrained because of the demeanor and arrogance of the Secretary
General. He has created more misunderstanding and hatred in the
institution and member States than he has made friends.
The Secretary General has usurped the power of the Council by
prescribing travel allowances which have primarily benefited him
contrary to the provisions of staff and financial rules and
regulations. He has misused the Council by discreetly introducing
amendments to the staff rules as to the implications of the amendments.
We have observed that the amendments were designed to cede power from
the Council to himself and were also an attempt to retroactively
validate the illegal increases he ordered. We have noted that his
attention had been drawn to the illegality and he ignored the advice.
The bulk of policy decisions made by the Authority and the Council have
not been implemented because they have received the Secretary General's
low priority. In addition he is hardly available to put in motion
machinery for implementation. Available statistics show that on the
average, the Secretary General is available in the office for only 7
days in any given month. …..
The secretary General upon assuming office stated that the Monetary
Harmonization Programme was over ambitious and unimplementable. As a
result, he launched a crusade against the programme already adopted by
the authority.
The unfortunate and unjustifiable non implementation of this programme
and the non-staffing of the division which made it non functional
constituted the break of linkage which was to exist between the
Secretary General and other COMESA institutions.
The above situation has seriously impeded the attainment of the
objectives of the COMESA Monetary and Financial Cooperation Committee
and the Committee of COMESA Board of Governors.
Recommendations….
……. in view of the management style pursued by the Secretary
General, his inability to mould and motivate a dedicated management
team, his flagrant and frequent breaches of the provisions of the
Treaty, the Staff and Financial Rules and Regulations, his misuse of
funds and office and in view of the spite demonstrated to the decisions
of the Council and the breach of the conditions of the compulsory
leave, the Committee recommends that the services of the Secretary
General be terminated forthwith as he lacks vision to take COMESA in
the next century.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is the man that Malawians elected to the
highest office of the land, the state presidency of the Republic Malawi
on May 20th. 2004. Stay tuned for the second instalment in this
narrative.
Nyasa Times
Post published in: Zimbabwe News