State Centralization and the Decline of Local Government in Malawi
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852399654004 |
| Published date | 01 December 1999 |
| Date | 01 December 1999 |
| Author | Jonathan Mayuyuka Kaunda |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 579
State centralization and the decline of local government
in Malawi
Jonathan Mayuyuka Kaunda
Introduction
This article posits that, for various reasons, the centralization of the state and local
government administrations has been a dominant characteristic of the Malawi
political system. This centralization may be explained by historically specific
factors. It has its roots in the colonial system of government, which was designed
for political control (and economic exploitation), in order to maintain the British
imperial system. The centralization was subsequently refined and deepened by
the one-party regime that existed between 1966 and 1994. This was ostensibly for
the purpose of maintaining national unity and cohesion, and to promote rapid
economic development. The centralization is being perpetuated by the leadership
of the recently established multi-party system, due to the lack of commitment in
furthering the cause of democracy.
Malawi, formerly known as the Nyasaland Protectorate, was colonized by
Britain for 73 years. During that time, the foundations of the local government
system were laid. The traditional argument for local government stresses that it is
desirable because of its democratic nature and potential for efficiency in the
provision of local social services. Influenced by the pluralist view of society, the
argument states that local government enhances the spread of power through
local political participation and self-government. Thus it checks the undesirable
concentration of power and authority at central government headquarters. It is
believed that local government allows for responsive and appropriate provision of
public services to local areas, so avoiding the impersonality, remoteness and
delays of central government delivery. The perceived accessibility of local
government to the community is also believed to enhance accountability, as well
as the capacity for building up public loyalty to the nation. In terms of administra-
tive efficiency, the argument emphasizes the cost and time savings that come with
the streamlining of long bureaucratic procedures, by adopting localized forms of
service provision (King and Pierre, 1990: 16–19; Stoker, 1991: 234–5). Local
government is, therefore, good for democracy and for efficient state administra-
tion.
Jonathan Mayuyuka Kaunda is Senior Lecturer, Political and Administrative Studies, and
Coordinator, MPA, University of Botswana.
International Review of Administrative Sciences [0020–8523(199912)65:4]
Copyright © 1999 IIAS. SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New
Delhi), Vol. 65 (1999), 579–595; 010606
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 580
580
International Review of Administrative Sciences 65(4)
However, the reconciliation of the democratic ideal with the efficiency prin-
ciple is problematical. The democratic imperative calls for the devolution of
power, while the quest for administrative efficiency often promotes bureaucrati-
cally centralized means of control. Local government may indeed be a vehicle for
local democracy that could provide services responsively to suit the local needs
and conditions, but it also is the local extension of the state. Local government
executes the policies of the central government and is used by it to maintain
national integration and cohesion. There is, therefore, a fundamental problem
of balancing local government democracy and autonomy on the one hand with
centralized state control on the other. Whereas this is a universal constraint, the
particular operation of central government in Malawi has entrenched centralized
state control to such an extent that local government has been undermined. The
re-introduction of a multi-party system has actually accelerated state centraliza-
tion. At root appears to be political expediency. It is, therefore, doubtful whether
the current leadership of the country has a genuine concern for the nurturing of a
decentralized and democratic political order.
The article is divided into four major sections. First, it traces the evolution of
local government administration from the colonial era to the present. Second, it
characterizes its organizational structure. Third, the article highlights the mecha-
nisms of central government political and statutory controls that have led to the
decline of local government. Finally, it considers the prospects for decentraliza-
tion and democracy. The article concludes that Malawi’s democratic transition is
incomplete. It has been undermined by continued state centralization. This is
evident in the decline of local government, as manifested in the absence of
elected local government institutions since the advent of the multi-party system.
The evolution of local government administration
Nyasaland’s colonial administration was established from 1891. The colonial
political institutions were centralized and excluded the participation of the indige-
nous people. A system of ‘indirect rule’ through the traditional chiefs was
adopted. The Governor headed the territorial hierarchy. He was a civil servant
seconded from the colonial headquarters. He acted as the chief representative and
agent of the British Empire. Below him were the Provincial Commissioners. At
the lowest level were the District Commissioners, who were in direct contact
with the local communities. The district commissioner controlled all aspects of
the local administration, including police and security, justice, finance and tax
collection.
The Governor was head of both the Legislative Council and the Executive
Council, which had been established as advisory bodies in July 1907. The
councils were composed of colonial government and other appointed officials.
The indigenous people were represented indirectly by an appointed (White)
missionary. African representation began in the Legislative Council in 1948 and
in the Executive Council in 1955. Nevertheless, none of the members of these
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 581
Mayuyuka Kaunda: Decline of local government in Malawi
581
bodies were elected but were government appointees. The councils remained
dominated, numerically and in terms of decision-making, by the central govern-
ment throughout the colonial period. The members of the councils represented
the interests of the settler planters, the traders, the missionaries and the colonial
administration itself, rather than the interests of the subjugated indigenous
people. The colonial legislative and executive councils, therefore, merely re-
inforced the privileges and served the wishes of the colonialist conquerors.
The district was the basic unit of administration. By 1912 the colonial adminis-
tration had incorporated the traditional chief into the official hierarchy. They
functioned as the district commissioner’s assistants in the maintenance of law and
order, the administration of justice, tax collection, and in other functions as
directed by the commissioner. In the words of the Deputy Governor, the aims of
the colonial administration were to
formulate a subsidiary local government in the districts . . . under the superintendence
of the District Resident [Commissioner] . . . As Government had maintained most
strongly, there should be only one Chief of a district, and that should be the District
Resident. (Malawi Government, 1969a: 12)
Each of the territorial divisions (provinces, districts, sections and villages) was
accordingly given clearly defined powers and duties, which were aimed at
centralized administrative control. The chiefs’ political powers were reoriented
and circumscribed in line with their official recognition. Their livelihood was
made dependent on the tax revenues that they helped collect, rather than on
customary tribute. The colonial authorities had thus pretended to preserve tradi-
tional institutions, whereas in effect they had captured the indigenous structures
of governance and used them to pursue their own dominant interests.
The colonialist control motive was evident in the 1933 Native Authorities
Ordinance, which strengthened the centralization of the local administration. The
Chief Secretary of the protectorate explained that the evolution of the indigenous
institutions ‘implied close and continuous direction, supervision and guidance by
[the colonial] administrative officers . . . European standards and methods must
be introduced . . . grafted on the pre-existing stock’ (Malawi Government, 1969b:
4). Thus, the traditional authorities were subordinated to the colonial administra-
tion. By that they lost their autonomy. The traditional institutions became
estranged from the mass of the people since the chiefs were now mere agents of
the colonial administration that was abhorred.
Limited local administration reforms were introduced following a change of
British policy in relation to the colonies, as from 1947. The Secretary of State
for the Colonies, Creech Jones, ostensibly aimed at introducing democratic and
efficient local government systems in the colonies. But his reforms, as explained
later, only served to entrench rather than diminish centralized control. A limited
form of local government in 1953 followed African representation in the
Legislative Council, which commenced in 1948. The Local Government (District
Councils) Ordinance was passed in that year. It introduced rural district councils
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 582
582
International Review of Administrative Sciences 65(4)
whose structure and functions were broadly based on the English model. There
...
State centralization and the decline of local government
in Malawi
Jonathan Mayuyuka Kaunda
Introduction
This article posits that, for various reasons, the centralization of the state and local
government administrations has been a dominant characteristic of the Malawi
political system. This centralization may be explained by historically specific
factors. It has its roots in the colonial system of government, which was designed
for political control (and economic exploitation), in order to maintain the British
imperial system. The centralization was subsequently refined and deepened by
the one-party regime that existed between 1966 and 1994. This was ostensibly for
the purpose of maintaining national unity and cohesion, and to promote rapid
economic development. The centralization is being perpetuated by the leadership
of the recently established multi-party system, due to the lack of commitment in
furthering the cause of democracy.
Malawi, formerly known as the Nyasaland Protectorate, was colonized by
Britain for 73 years. During that time, the foundations of the local government
system were laid. The traditional argument for local government stresses that it is
desirable because of its democratic nature and potential for efficiency in the
provision of local social services. Influenced by the pluralist view of society, the
argument states that local government enhances the spread of power through
local political participation and self-government. Thus it checks the undesirable
concentration of power and authority at central government headquarters. It is
believed that local government allows for responsive and appropriate provision of
public services to local areas, so avoiding the impersonality, remoteness and
delays of central government delivery. The perceived accessibility of local
government to the community is also believed to enhance accountability, as well
as the capacity for building up public loyalty to the nation. In terms of administra-
tive efficiency, the argument emphasizes the cost and time savings that come with
the streamlining of long bureaucratic procedures, by adopting localized forms of
service provision (King and Pierre, 1990: 16–19; Stoker, 1991: 234–5). Local
government is, therefore, good for democracy and for efficient state administra-
tion.
Jonathan Mayuyuka Kaunda is Senior Lecturer, Political and Administrative Studies, and
Coordinator, MPA, University of Botswana.
International Review of Administrative Sciences [0020–8523(199912)65:4]
Copyright © 1999 IIAS. SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New
Delhi), Vol. 65 (1999), 579–595; 010606
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 580
580
International Review of Administrative Sciences 65(4)
However, the reconciliation of the democratic ideal with the efficiency prin-
ciple is problematical. The democratic imperative calls for the devolution of
power, while the quest for administrative efficiency often promotes bureaucrati-
cally centralized means of control. Local government may indeed be a vehicle for
local democracy that could provide services responsively to suit the local needs
and conditions, but it also is the local extension of the state. Local government
executes the policies of the central government and is used by it to maintain
national integration and cohesion. There is, therefore, a fundamental problem
of balancing local government democracy and autonomy on the one hand with
centralized state control on the other. Whereas this is a universal constraint, the
particular operation of central government in Malawi has entrenched centralized
state control to such an extent that local government has been undermined. The
re-introduction of a multi-party system has actually accelerated state centraliza-
tion. At root appears to be political expediency. It is, therefore, doubtful whether
the current leadership of the country has a genuine concern for the nurturing of a
decentralized and democratic political order.
The article is divided into four major sections. First, it traces the evolution of
local government administration from the colonial era to the present. Second, it
characterizes its organizational structure. Third, the article highlights the mecha-
nisms of central government political and statutory controls that have led to the
decline of local government. Finally, it considers the prospects for decentraliza-
tion and democracy. The article concludes that Malawi’s democratic transition is
incomplete. It has been undermined by continued state centralization. This is
evident in the decline of local government, as manifested in the absence of
elected local government institutions since the advent of the multi-party system.
The evolution of local government administration
Nyasaland’s colonial administration was established from 1891. The colonial
political institutions were centralized and excluded the participation of the indige-
nous people. A system of ‘indirect rule’ through the traditional chiefs was
adopted. The Governor headed the territorial hierarchy. He was a civil servant
seconded from the colonial headquarters. He acted as the chief representative and
agent of the British Empire. Below him were the Provincial Commissioners. At
the lowest level were the District Commissioners, who were in direct contact
with the local communities. The district commissioner controlled all aspects of
the local administration, including police and security, justice, finance and tax
collection.
The Governor was head of both the Legislative Council and the Executive
Council, which had been established as advisory bodies in July 1907. The
councils were composed of colonial government and other appointed officials.
The indigenous people were represented indirectly by an appointed (White)
missionary. African representation began in the Legislative Council in 1948 and
in the Executive Council in 1955. Nevertheless, none of the members of these
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 581
Mayuyuka Kaunda: Decline of local government in Malawi
581
bodies were elected but were government appointees. The councils remained
dominated, numerically and in terms of decision-making, by the central govern-
ment throughout the colonial period. The members of the councils represented
the interests of the settler planters, the traders, the missionaries and the colonial
administration itself, rather than the interests of the subjugated indigenous
people. The colonial legislative and executive councils, therefore, merely re-
inforced the privileges and served the wishes of the colonialist conquerors.
The district was the basic unit of administration. By 1912 the colonial adminis-
tration had incorporated the traditional chief into the official hierarchy. They
functioned as the district commissioner’s assistants in the maintenance of law and
order, the administration of justice, tax collection, and in other functions as
directed by the commissioner. In the words of the Deputy Governor, the aims of
the colonial administration were to
formulate a subsidiary local government in the districts . . . under the superintendence
of the District Resident [Commissioner] . . . As Government had maintained most
strongly, there should be only one Chief of a district, and that should be the District
Resident. (Malawi Government, 1969a: 12)
Each of the territorial divisions (provinces, districts, sections and villages) was
accordingly given clearly defined powers and duties, which were aimed at
centralized administrative control. The chiefs’ political powers were reoriented
and circumscribed in line with their official recognition. Their livelihood was
made dependent on the tax revenues that they helped collect, rather than on
customary tribute. The colonial authorities had thus pretended to preserve tradi-
tional institutions, whereas in effect they had captured the indigenous structures
of governance and used them to pursue their own dominant interests.
The colonialist control motive was evident in the 1933 Native Authorities
Ordinance, which strengthened the centralization of the local administration. The
Chief Secretary of the protectorate explained that the evolution of the indigenous
institutions ‘implied close and continuous direction, supervision and guidance by
[the colonial] administrative officers . . . European standards and methods must
be introduced . . . grafted on the pre-existing stock’ (Malawi Government, 1969b:
4). Thus, the traditional authorities were subordinated to the colonial administra-
tion. By that they lost their autonomy. The traditional institutions became
estranged from the mass of the people since the chiefs were now mere agents of
the colonial administration that was abhorred.
Limited local administration reforms were introduced following a change of
British policy in relation to the colonies, as from 1947. The Secretary of State
for the Colonies, Creech Jones, ostensibly aimed at introducing democratic and
efficient local government systems in the colonies. But his reforms, as explained
later, only served to entrench rather than diminish centralized control. A limited
form of local government in 1953 followed African representation in the
Legislative Council, which commenced in 1948. The Local Government (District
Councils) Ordinance was passed in that year. It introduced rural district councils
03_IRAS65/4articles 11/11/99 11:05 am Page 582
582
International Review of Administrative Sciences 65(4)
whose structure and functions were broadly based on the English model. There
...
To continue reading
Request your trial