Abstract

This paper briefly argues that it does not need a particular regime type in order to promote good governance but rather the political will of those in leadership positions. To begin with, the study found that both regimes failed to promote rule of law despite that the one party rule performed worst in comparison to the two democratic regimes. The study findings further indicate that both regimes have given little room for people’s meaningful participation. In connection to accountability, the study results indicate that the one party rule did not give Malawians any access to information because there were no vibrant CSOs, NGOs and Media houses that would facilitate the checks and balances, which democracy has. The findings reveal that there were still chances of shutting down these institutions or silencing them during the democratic dispensation. On promoting equality and social justice, the study revealed that both regimes had problems to fairly distribute public resources due to political affiliation of the intended beneficiaries though the one party era performed better. This study, therefore, argues that it is not necessarily a regime type that would enhance good governance in Malawi but rather the political will of those in authority. Finally, it can also be deduced from the study findings that being democratic does not automatically imply having good governance in the country.

More details

School	: School of Law, Economics and Government
Issued Date	: 2016

Download full document