Malawi Economic Festival Network

KC JOURNAL NO 4 June 2003

The Principal Secretary
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Corporation
Capital Hill
P.O. Box 30315
Lilongwe 3
Dear Sir / Madam
CIVIL SOCIETY COMMENTS ON NEPAD
We, members from the civil society in Malawi call on our government not to endorse the implementation of the N initiative until several issues given below such as priorities for Malawi are sorted out. We have met several times civil society to discuss, among other things, the initiative and have found that NEPAD leaves out prospects of b for Malawi.

We fully welcome the idea of having an African Regional Initiative, as this would bring new vision for Africa. A others, the initiative would allow some expensive projects in the region to be pursued jointly and so be cost effect would also promote trade investment and assist exchange rate stability.

However on the NEPAD specifically, we have serious reservations and we would like to register the same to our government. Our concerns are both in content and process.

Content
Having thoroughly gone through the document, we note that:

NEPAD proposes to continue using the old neo-liberal models of development that have failed Africa for l as such this initiative does not offer any hope for turn around of poverty in Africa, let alone Malawi.

The document is very general and takes all African countries at the same level.

NEPAD is gender neutral and mentions women and children in passing implying that it has limited plans f women and children.

Sectoral specific is the concern that the initiative does not recognise and put clear plans for HIV/AIDS that h greatly affected (and continues to affect) Malawi.

The document was also drawn without assessment of failures / successes of the older regional block such
SADC, COMESAS, ECOWAS.

The antithesis of the document is that developing economies like Malawi and most African countries need a different approach than those already chartered by the western world, a fact not recognized by NEPAD.

Almost all conditions given in the NEPAD are governance-related. Much as we agree, the following conditi (which are not in the document) ought to be recognized for any sustainable initiative if it is to deliver: Polit will; Economic stability; Protected environment and Enabling international environment

There is a lot of duplication in the document. The strategies highlighted there in are already taken by sub-re organisations like SADC, COMESA AND ECOWAS.

Given the crop of leaders we have in Africa, the document does not espouse on how Africa would ensure t there is transparency and accountability in the mobilization of resources.

Membership of the implementation committee is not representative of the poor African countries

The process.
Reflecting on the process followed in the formulation of NEPAD, we as stakeholders in Malawi are not convince the government has done all it could to harness Malawian input in the process. Unlike the participation precede was set in the PRSP formulation for Malawi, we feel that the NEPAD initiative was rushed and not participatory.

Although the international financing institutions praise NEPAD, most citizens in Malawi are yet to be given mor information on the initiative that they are said to own. It feels as if the drivers of the NEPAD i.e. Presidents Tha Mbeki and Obasanjo seem interested in getting the support of the G8 and the International Financing Institutions (IFIs) than getting the African ownership of the initiative. We want to believe that the Malawi government does n encourage this approach – an initiative of such importance as NEPAD ought to be drawn through a transparent, w

WordPress › Error

There has been a critical error on your website.

Learn more about debugging in WordPress.