Namiwa describes Justice Jabber Alide-led Commission of Inquiry’s report as shallow and a waste of time and resources

* Lack of government’s tangible action on the report proves critics right that the setting up of the commission was merely an attempt to exonerate President Chakwera and his government

* From blame over that tragic accident and, sadly, heap the blame on weather and the deceased who cannot defend themselves

* If it were an honest and serious government undertaking, by now heads should have rolled and some people should have been behind bars

* Same man who withdrew a few days after he was sworn in as member of the Commission of Inquiry that was constituted by President Lazarus Chakwera

By Duncan Mlanjira

Centre for Democracy & Economic Initiative (CDEDI) Executive Director, Silvester Namiwa — who withdrew a few days after he was sworn in as member of the Commission of Inquiry that was constituted by President Lazarus Chakwera to probe circumstances surrounding the June 10, 2024 plane crash that killed Vice-President Saulos Klaus Chilima and eight others, has ripped apart the findings of the investigations — describing Justice Jabber Alide-led Commission’s report as “shallow” and “a waste of time and resources”.

Namiwa resigned a few days later after his suggestion to have the inquiry streamed live was rejected and he now comes to declare that “there is inaction from government 21 days after the release of that sham of a report”.

“The inactivity from government confirms our considered view that the setting up of the Commission of Inquiry by the President, and the resultant shallow report from commission, which was led by Justice Jabber Alide was a waste of time and resources.

“Actually, lack of government’s tangible action on the report proves critics right that the setting up of the commission was merely an attempt to exonerate President Chakwera and his government from blame over that tragic accident and, sadly, heap the blame on weather and the deceased who cannot defend themselves.

“If it were an honest and serious government undertaking, by now heads should have rolled and some people should have been behind bars.”

Namiwa contends that having combed the report, “CDEDI is of the view that it is not a product of the commission — rather [it] has been imposed on the commission by some excessively self-centred individuals bent on hoodwinking Malawians to let sleeping dogs lie, and move on”.

“This is deduced from the report’s glaring inconsistencies and contradictions, coupled with government’s inaction despite the report pointing at acts of criminal acts that are felony in nature.”

Thus far, Namiwa says “CDEDI reiterates its stand that President Chakwera should fire the Malawi Defence Force (MDF) Commander, General Paul Velentino Phiri for his incompetent leadership that saw the MDF taking 24 hours to locate the crash site, allegedly due to the thickness of the forest and the blatant lie that there was no settlement near the crash site”.

He also says Minister of Information & Digitalisation Moses Kunkuyu “should have been fired for lying that the voice and data recorder of the ill-fated aircraft had been kept safe, awaiting the inquiry” — and that Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (MACRA) Director General, Daud Suleman “should have been fired for initiating a hotline 261 purportedly calling for those that had information in relation to the crash site when the plane crashed very close to an active and functional telecommunications tower”.

Minister of Local Government & National Unity, Richard Chimwendo Banda “should also have been sent packing for lying that he was prevented from boarding the aircraft because it was full”.

“Meanwhile, CDEDI implores the next non-Chakwera government to investigate this plane crash Commission of Inquiry team and, also, set up an independent commission of inquiry to probe the death of the former Justice Minister and Attorney General Ralph Kasambara.

“To put the record straight, the report on the 10th June 2024 plane crash is an act of betrayal that should be rejected in its entirety by all well-meaning Malawians.

“It is important to state that the subject matter revolved around a sitting Vice-President, whose life spanned beyond a family tree; the former first lady Patricia Shanil Dzimbiri; three military officers; a medical practitioner; two senior police officers and a senior public servant.

“Therefore, Alide and his team were expected to carry out their work with utmost precision and determination to provide answers to Malawians’ many questions surrounding that tragic accident.

“That said, CDEDI feels vindicated that a public inquiry was the only way out to build trust and confidence in Malawians, and findings of the inquiry would have brought a fair closure to Malawians’ grief.

“Otherwise, the report only relied on two testimonies of the Principal Secretary (PS) in the Office of the Vice-President Dr. Luckie Sikwese and special assistant (media) in the same office, Winnie Nyondo.

“Unfortunately, the report merely succeeded in rubbing salt on the wounds of millions of Malawians that were taken back to June 10 and 11, 2024 mourning period which was characterised by attempts to suppress local voices, gag the media and muzzle freedom of opinion and expression.

“The bizarre mission of the Alide-led commission of inquiry is clearly mirrored through a deliberate ploy to leave out key witnesses, ignoring important leads, casually handling pertinent issues while giving prime time to petty issues that did not touch on matters Malawians had many questions on over the plane crash.”

However, during the course of investigations, Justice Alide kept updating the public that the Commission was concerned that while the response of the individuals summoned to appear before it, there was poor response to its call for information, and voluntary presentation of any information as regards to the accident.

“This is notwithstanding the continued publicity of the on-going business of the Commissions through various media platforms,” he had said a public statement that was issued on November 14. “So far, only one person has voluntarily responded to the call, some of whom have already appeared before the Commission.

“Considering the national interest and the wide debate that the aircraft accident generated and the subsequent calls for the inquiry in both the social media and mainstream media, it was the commission’s expectation that members of the general public were going to respond to the commission’s call.”

The Commission thus repeated its call to the members of the general public who had, or had heard, any information on the aircraft accident “to make their submissions to the Commissions through”.

In his long public statement, Namiwa highlights “some of the loose ends that CDEDI noted in the sham report, which it feels justifies its stand that the commission of inquiry was a waste of Malawians’ resources and time.

1. Black Box

Since the 1950s, aircraft are manufactured complete with voice recorders, popularly known as black box, for good reasons. The ill-fated MDF Dornier 228-202 (K) had one in place.

Now, Malawians may wish to know that in their wisdom, the commissioners did not see the need to inquire the whereabouts of such an important gadget despite lamenting its absence time and again!

Refer to 3.8 under sub-heading ‘From Search and Rescue to Discovery of the Wreckage’, page 76 paragraph 2: “In the absence of the voice recorder in the aircraft cockpit…. 3.1.4 under sub-heading; Other findings bullet 4, the report says installation of equipment such as ELT, flight, data recorder and cockpit voice recorders are not mandatory.

By concluding so, the commission conveniently forgot that Hon. Kunkuyu, in his official capacity as government spokesperson, assured the nation during a press briefing held on June 18, 2024 in Lilongwe, that all relevant gadgets, including the black box were duly retrieved and kept safe.

Why did the commission not summon Kunkuyu on the same? And, since it is understood that all planes have this gadget from the manufacturer, why did the commission not summon the MDF Commander to explain what happened and where is the one for the MAF-TO3?

In the absence of a clear explanation on that from the MDF, then Malawians will have no reason not to go by what Hon Kunkuyu told them that the black box was duly retrieved and is being kept safe somewhere, unless he retracts his statement, but why should he? Where did he get the information he told Malawians that day?

2. Fuel in the aircraft

According to the preliminary FBU report, the airplane had 483 litres of fuel on June 9, 2024 prior to departure, information that has been corroborated by the report.

But the commission betrayed itself and Malawians by only relying on an opinion of one Colonel Julius Mdokhwe, who alleged that it was normal for a Dornier to crash without catching fire since fuel tanks are in the wings.

This should have prompted the commissioners to inquire the whereabouts of the three-hour fuel. It was necessary to probe that further since, the same report documents that there was no fuel spillage and no fire at the crash site.

For the record, after the Chikangawa crash, one aircraft crashed in Lilongwe and another in Nkhotakota where there was fire in the latter where the passenger survived while the pilot perished.

Elsewhere, in South Korea, a Boeing jet crashed and exploded on impact, proof that there was fuel. Few days prior, an Embaraer 190 crashed and although it did not explode, flames were seen on site.

Who will tell Malawians the truth about 10th June 2024 aircraft crash? Surely, someone will someday.

3. Absence of blood, urine and saliva

This probably was a serious issue that if it were not a staged inquest, it would have changed the narrative. But the commission gave itself away as recorded in 2.3.1.5 page 54, paragraph 3, under sub-heading ‘Pathologists’ Findings on the cause of death’ “….Jet A 1 fuel and soil dust was found in the cabin and deep in open wounds on the bodies whether they were ejected from the aircraft or trapped…..it was his testimony that death had already occasioned at the point of ejection, evidenced by lack of blood at the site where they were found….”

The same is repeated in 2.3.1.6 under sub-heading ‘Survivability’ …..”death occurred instantly upon impact, the accident was not survivable…”

In a serious inquiry this should have been the lead to find out what happened to the blood, urine and saliva?

4. Hon. Richard Chimwendo Banda

The commission dedicated a lot of time in trying to clear and protect individuals at the expense of truth. The FBU report says the MAF TO3 had a 19-passenger capacity and in the sham report under 2.1.2 under the sub-heading ‘Movement of the remains of late Mr. Kasambara SC’, Page 17, paragraph 2… “It was confirmed by the Aircraft and Mzuzu Airport Tower that from Chileka, the aircraft carried nine passengers, three crew and one silent soul….”

However, in minute 2.1.5 under sub-heading ‘Journey from KIA to Mzuzu’, paragraph 5, … “In that regard, there were six passengers on the flight, instead of eight and three crew members…”

The Commission gave itself away on page 24, paragraph 1, “Dr. Sikwese confirmed to have received a call from the Secretary to the President and Cabinet (SPC), inquiring if there was space in the aircraft to accommodate Hon. Chimwendo Banda.

Dr. Sikwese confirmed that he advised the SPC that the aircraft was full because at that time there was no indication that Madam [Mary] Chilima and her close protection officer were not travelling…”

The commission should have known the sitting capacity of the said aircraft was 19 and also realise that the previous day it carried nine passengers. So, it was not correct to say the plane was full.

Now that the SPC was brought in the picture, the commission should have asked the reporter from Times Television, Wonder Msiska, who actually tipped him between Hon. Chimwendo and the SPC Colleen Zamba?

From the above, it is clear that if, indeed, Dr. Sikwese made such a testimony, he lied under oath since there was space in the aircraft, at least going by the previous day’s manifest.

The commission betrayed itself by allowing the PS to get away with his lie. Meanwhile, Malawians would conclude that some people had privileged information that the airplane was not safe for others to travel on, or Dr. Sikwese should admit that he lied under oath.

Then, there is the issue about the missing K5 million for condoling the Kasambara family. Given the lie above, did the PS really hand over the money to Chilima? If he lied on the aircraft, how do we trust him on the money issue, let alone his testimony to the Commission?

5. The 24 Hour search

According to both the sham report and the FBU one, the plane crashed at 10:16 hours on June 10, 2024 and the wreckage was discovered 24 hours later, at 10:00 hours on June 11, 2024.

Apparently, in the sham report, the commission dedicated many pages to justify the 24-hour national suspense. They tried in vain to create an impression that there was rigorous search and rescue mission.

However, their negative energy is exposed by a few lines in their own report and, also, the FBU report. The latter under sub-heading ‘Analysis of Mobile Radio Data’, page 16 …. “Four mobile devices of the three occupants had been switched on and logged onto different radio cells.

While the former, indicates in 2.2.7 page 35 paragraph 4, under sub- heading ‘Communication from the passengers’, evidence indicates that there were several phones which were active during the flight to Mzuzu.

These phones belonging to the late Assistant Commissioner of Police Kapheni, the late Inspector Chimaneni and the late Major Aidin. Evidence obtained from Telekom Networks Malawi plc show that one of the phones belonging to Mr. Daniel Friday Kanyemba had gone off at 10:16 (the crash time) on 10th June 2024.

The last tower that it used was the one belonging to TNM at Nthungwa, the site of the accident. This information was given long after the aircraft was discovered.

The very last sentence of the commission exposes total hypocrisy and the motive behind the whole inquiry. This is one area Malawians should have benefited from their right to know who made this testimony, in the first place?

Secondly, why did the Commission, in its wisdom, decide to keep that very revealing sentence in its final report? When Mr. Sylvester Namiwa appeared before the Commission, he presented before it an interview where Hon. Kunkuyu was on record as saying MACRA, having exhausted all they could do to help in locating the crash site, decided to seek help from their counterparts in Tanzania, Rwanda and Angola.

This to any rational being meant they had already tried both TNM and Airtel and failed; hence, the 261 hotline initiative, calling upon those with information to call for free on both lines.

How could the service providers sit on Nthungwa breakthrough and accept to join a goose search? In whose interest were they doing this?

MACRA being the defacto custodian of all telecommunications infrastructure had the vital information on this Tower at Nthungwa, therefore, there was no justification that the search could have been deferred to Ekwendeni, Usisya or another area apart from Nthungwa since it was precise information from the tower.

This could not take even five soldiers the whole 24 hours to locate the plane. Information about the location was known, now the Commission should have helped us to understand what was happening during the 24 hours?

Should we say it was a question of cluelessness and incompetence that we had to seek external help when we had a powerful lead to the crash site at a fingertip? Why, then, is Mr. Suleman, having appeared before this Commission with his testimony, not appearing anywhere in the report?

Should Malawians live in fear of an incompetent army since it took over 200 MDF soldiers 24 hours to comb a 10-kilometre radius to search for the country’s Second Citizen, and three of their own?

If it is incompetence and outright negligence, why is it that no action has been taken against the MACRA and MDF bosses almost three weeks after the release of the report?

6. Concealing and destruction of evidence

Both the Alide and the FBU reports have it on record that the aircraft wreckage was tampered with, but no names have been mentioned and the Commission was too nice not to inquire more about this matter.

If those members of the Commission were not aware that tampering with evidence is a criminal offence that is felony in nature, it justifies CDEDI’s stand that the undertaking was a waste of resources and time.

Malawians deserve to know those who tampered with the wreckage, and why? Malawians were equally shocked to learn that the bodies were also tampered with at Sunset Mortuary in Kanengo as recorded in the report’s minute 2.3.1.4, page 53 at the bottom bullet (a) and (b).

It is baffling that the Commission’s worry was on taking of pictures of the bodies and where they ended up. But, surprisingly, the Commission did not summon the morticians to tell them who ordered them to clean, pack and suture the wounds.

Malawians refuse to accept that this just simply happened. It was a calculated move to destroy evidence. There an offence was committed, but why has police not acted on this lead?

7. Strange acts

The Commission that had powers equal to the High Court, coupled with unhindered access to government ministries, departments and agencies, including their documents, comes back to tell the taxpayers that funded the inquiry that it was denied access to critical dossier of key eye witness interviews by the Malawi Police Service (MPS).

This sounds too good to be true and provides enough reason for Malawians to discredit the report. Read minute 3.13 page 81, last but one paragraph under sub-heading ‘Photographs at the accident scene. “…in the course of gathering evidence, the Commission was informed that the police had conducted interviews and taken statements from a number of witnesses, which is in a docket that would be availed to the Commission.

Despite several and specific reminders to the police, the docket was not provided to the Commission. This rendered the whole commission useless on one hand, while on the other making someone within the MPS as being above the law.”

By including this bit in the report, the commissioners validated CDEDI’s earlier stand that this was a sham of a report.

8. Credibility of the autopsy

As indicated already, after the Chikangawa plane crash, in Malawi and elsewhere in the world, there have been plane crashes. So far we have had two within the country — one in Lilongwe, where no one died and another in Nkhotakota, where a passenger survived with minor bruises.

Just recently, in South Korea, a plane crashed and two survived while in Kazakhstan, a plane crashed and 29 people survived. All these were flying at a higher altitude than the ill-fated MAF TO3.

Apart from Dr. Sikwese and Ms Winnie Nyondo, the Alide report also relies on the autopsy and testimonies of Dr. [Steve] Kamiza, who told the Commission, according to minute 3.12, page 81, under sub-heading ‘Survivability of the accident’ “From the evidence before it, it is the Commission’s finding that all persons on board the aircraft died instantly upon the aircraft impacting the ground.

It is, therefore, the Commission’s finding that no one could have survived the accident. All the injuries were no-survivable.” This, read with minute 3.13 on the same page under sub-heading ‘Photographs at the Accident Scene’: “The commission heard evidence from a number of persons who indicated that their roles in the aircraft accident would have been performed better if there were proper and professional forensic pictures of the scene of the accident and the deceased.”

In our view, this includes pictures of the pathologists and criminal investigators, among others. Furthermore, in minute 2.3.1.4 page 52 under sub-heading ‘Autopsy, environment, Findings’: “It is in evidence of Dr. Kamiza that ideally he should have visited the crash site after the accident as soon as possible, to appreciate first-hand the accident circumstances.

Without visiting the site, he relied on verbal information from interviews with police and military officers and medical personnel who were the first to arrive on the scene, as well as some limited photographic evidence taken by police and military officers.

He stated that the photographs that were taken were not as enough, and professionally taken. And most of the pictures were taken after the crashed aircraft and site were tampered with.

On her part, Dr. [Tamiwe] Tomoka testified that it was difficult to get interviews from the military and the police who were first respondents at the site. She further said that they did as much as they could in the environment they worked in.

Her last sentence serves as the litmus test of the credibility of the autopsy reports, whose evidence has been heavily relied upon by the Commission.

Simply put, it was difficult to carry out a befitting autopsy. Ironically, these earth-shaking revelations were not enough to raise red flags to the Commission. Or they simply threw all caution to the wind and rushed to conclude their report.

9. Obstructing State agents and organs to do their work

In minute 2.3.1.4 under sub-heading ‘Autopsy Methodology, Environment and Findings, Page 52, last but one paragraph, Deputy Commissioner of Police Mitayi testified that the police, initially, took a few photographs, but were stopped by Colonel Julius Mdokhwe of Air Force Zomba, for alleged security reasons.

Fire officer Toby Khunga of Mzuzu Airport also testified that they were not allowed to take pictures. A Mzuzu Central Hospital senior medical officer, who was on the medical team first to arrive at the scene, testified that they were prevented from taking pictures for forensic purposes.

This is why, Dr. Kamiza and Dr. Tomoka condemned the pictures above. Now, the way this army officer conducted himself was a clear case of obstruction of duty, which is an offence.

His conduct created an impression that this was an MDF show. But, then, of what use were the inclusions of police, medical, airport, fire departments and other organs in the search and rescue mission?

If his acts were genuine, why did he not avail himself to the pathologists to ease their struggle? According to the witness list, what was this Zomba-based officer doing in the North at that time?

Who gave him the authority to stop identifiable officers of other organs in the search and rescue team to carry out their duties? Why did the Commission let him slip through their fingers when he appeared before it?

He should have been given quality time to justify his actions? In whose interest did he act that way? Why did the Commission seem helpless on him? And, was it by coincidence that the same pictures badly needed by the pathologists were denied on the site by Colonel Mdokhwe?

10. President Chakwera said the plane reached Mzuzu

Suspectedly, aware that President Chakwera had goofed by telling Malawians that the ill-fated aircraft crashed on its return from Mzuzu, the Commission gave itself away by trying to create an impression that there was miscommunication between the President and Army Commander General Velentino Phiri.

In minute 3.7, under sub-heading ‘Notification to His Excellency the President, Content, and Response’ page 75 paragraph 1, the Commission says the President was alerted about the missing plane carrying his vice at 11:35 hours.

In the second paragraph, the Commission further established that at 12:15 hours, His Excellency the President understood the MDF Commander’s telephone call as an alert to the effect that the aircraft was failing to land in Mzuzu due to bad weather and may be on its way back to KIA.

At this point, His Excellency the President advised the Commander to report back progress within four hours. Without mincing words, the Commission exposed President Chakwera’s laissez faire fare approach towards important matters.

Think about this, the plane was supposed to land at 10:00 hours, if he was alerted an hour later, then, it had fuel for three hours, assuming General Phiri informed him so (if he didn’t, the more reason he should be sacked for misinforming the President), where did the President get the luxury of expecting an update in four hours?

Secondly, given the sensitivity and magnitude of the matter, having misunderstood the MDF commander at noon, was there no room for him to double check the facts before his address nine hours later, when he addressed the nation at almost midnight on June 10, 2024?

In all fairness, did the Commission expect Malawians to accept this desperate attempt to insulate the President and, also, protect the MDF Commander? If, indeed, Chakwera cared a dime about Chilima, why would he not pay attention to detail on plane on which he was, which had gone missing?

Instead, the President calmly waited for a whole four hours! What did he think was happening to Chilima and the eight others aboard that aircraft? And, when all is said and done, Malawians would want to know the person who told the President that the aircraft reached Mzuzu.

11. Tactical avoidance of leads

It is surprising to note that there is a mention from multiple witnesses about strange sounds of the aircraft and explosives. The witnesses likened the same to sounds of gunshots and dynamite.

This should have provided leads to the Commission as to why some bodies’ wounds were sutured without prior authority or clearance? Surprisingly, no specific recommendation was made in this sensitive area.

12. Possession of items from the aircraft

Being found in possession of anything suspected to have been stolen is an offence, but we hear about this MDF soldier who was found, in Mzuzu, with a pistol that was among items that were on the plane that crash.

Why has this officer not been arrested? Has the law changed? For interest’s sake, was this pistol legally under his custody? Why did the Commission decide not to probe this matter or, better still, recommend the same in the report?

13. Withholding information on identities

Why is the commission withholding identities of those that arrived first at the crash site? In whose interest is the Commission doing this?

14. Eye witness accounts

Why were the TNM tower guards merely quizzed on the weather, and not on what they saw and observed on these fateful days?

15. Crucial respondents

Why did the Commission decide not to summon the Northern Region police commissioner? Who was in charge of the suspended search? Who ordered the dismissal of the late Vice-President’s motorcade?

16. Media interviews

Zodiak Broadcasting Station (ZBS) interviewed a local person living in the vicinity of the crash site, thereby dismissing General Velentino Phiri’s assertion that there were no settlements in the area.

One of the villagers who, according to the report’s Annex 3 ‘List of witness’ No 44, Corled Mkosi appeared before the Commission and testified that he phoned Chikangawa Police, Northern Region Police, Mibawa Television, OPC and the Ombudsman Grace Malera.

But what has been attributed to him in the report is not substantial compared to his recorded media interview. How does the Commission reconcile this anomaly?

Before resigning from the Commission, Mr. Sylvester Namiwa presented a clip of a ZBS interview with Mkosi to the Commission. In fact, Mr Namiwa personally shared this clip with commissioner Monsignor Patrick Thawale.

It was Mr. Namiwa’s hope that those that Mkosi mentioned in the ZBS interview, would be heard by the Commission, but if the list is of those that appeared before the commission is anything to go by, none of them was summoned.

What is contained on in minute 2.2.10 on page 39, under sub-heading ‘Leads, Evidence, of the aircraft Sighting and aircraft Navigation’ as Mr. Mkosi’s testimony, is a watered down and incoherent version of the aforementioned interview.

17. An hour before the discovery of the wreckage

In minute 2.2.14 page 44, the Commission report reads: “At around 09:00 hours, a team from the Airforce, including Colonel Mdokhwe, arrived from Zomba to join in the search.

They were briefed as to what had happened the previous night and what was to happen that morning as the search for the missing aircraft continued.

At this point, the police had also received some information that the area around Phamphara Hill should also be searched. Why did someone who had just joined the search and rescue team become so powerful?

Why was the TNM tower, standing just a stone throw away for the accident site, not considered for the search? Did police receive information or clearance to also search Phamphara Hill? Does this ring a bell while Malawians were made to believe that the area was thick, and had no settlements in sight?

Was it sheer coincidence that the information to, also, search this area came an hour after the arrival of Mdokhwe, who obstructed identifiable State organs and departments, including medics, to do their job?

After all is said and done, it is prudent to note that the taxpayer-sponsored Commission consumed a whopping K200 million at a time some Malawians were surviving on chitedze [buffalo beans], wild tubers and mangoes awaited answers that would help them find a closure to the grief caused by the tragic accident.

And, from CDEDI’s reading of the 117-page report, now Malawians have more questions than ever before. May God help our nation to know the truth about that tragic incident.

We remain resolute and unshakeable in the sermon that the Archbishop of Blantyre, Thomas Luke Msusa delivered at Chilima’s burial that ‘Someone’ captured ‘everything’ that happened in the circumstances that led to that accident and that “that ‘Someone’ will reveal it to Malawians at an opportune time.