> DEMOCRACY

The National Language Factor in Malawi - forcefully repeats that a national language is needed for purposes of citizens’ participation. Chichewa language would continue to exist alongside ChiMalawi, without substantive difference...

BETWEEN THE TRIBE AND THE NATION

Among the issues under discussion in the current national constitutional review is national language. According to reports, many written and oral submissions to the special commission have urged for the introduction of a national language in the constitution. In its deliberation the commission has examined the merits and demerits of the proposal. In terms of merits, it is said the national language would function as an expression of a national identity. Such a language, the argument continues, would also make the dissemination of development policies easy. This is in addition to the enhancement of national unity and the easing of communication across the country.

Illogical conclusion
According to the 1966 Malawi Census Report, 50.2% of the population then spoke Chichewa, 14% Lomwe, 13% Yao, and 9% Tumbuka. The 1998 Malawi Census Report shows that 75% of the national population speak and understand Chichewa. Going back to some decades ago, records state that Chinyanja / Chichewa functioned as a national language from 1912 to 1967 and that the same was a medium of instruction (standards 1-4) and an examination subject from primary to tertiary level of education from 1968 to 1994. However, in its conclusion the special commission opted against the proposal for the constitution to recognise a national language. What appears to be very strange is the discrepancy between the reasons given for this position and the acknowledged principles of both logic and democracy. The special commission has argued that there is no problem created by the current status that needs to be cured by the introduction of a national language in the constitution. This point is misleading in that it gives a wrong impression that a national language is needed only if there is a problem to be resolved.
Another reason given by the commission is that giving constitutional recognition to Chichewa as a national language might only result in creating unnecessary tension in the country. Critically speaking, this reason is suspicious and vague. There is nothing on the ground to prove that there would be tension in the country as a result of a piece of legislation on a language that 75% of the national population already speak and understand. Bizarre conclusions like these heighten the feeling that notwithstanding the personal integrity of some members of the commission, in some instances debates on topics like this one, seem to have been guided more by tribal instincts than informed reason.

Thinking differently
Discussions on national language need to take into account the historical nature of the African state. It has insistently been argued that the modern African state is an invented state. It is not a political expression of the self-understanding of the African people. Pre-colonial African states were constituted differently. The imposition of the colonial structure introduced disruptions and fragmentations of these states. In many cases communities that were traditionally hostile to each other ended up lumped together in one state. At independence these communities had not yet been wielded together into a nation. Consequently, almost continent-wide, nationalist governments faced the daunting task of state building, on one hand, and nation building, on the other. While state building was concerned with the construction and strengthening of the formal institutions of that state, especially those that make public life possible, nation building focused on wielding diverse ethnic groups into one political identity. In Malawi, it was within the framework of the nation building agenda that national language policy was introduced and implemented.

Nation building
In order to appreciate national language within the framework of nation building, it is important to understand the meaning of the concept of nation itself, and its referent. A nation is a community of people who feel that they belong together in the double sense that they share deeply significant elements of common heritage and that they have a collective destiny for the future. A nation is, in other words, a body of people who feel that they are a nation. Thus, a nation, unlike ethnicity, is first and foremost, a subjective entity, and not an ascriptive identity. The aspect of feeling is very crucial to being a nation. For Malawi, it can be contested as to whether at independence the diverse ethnic groups shared this deep collective feeling of belonging together. This is not to deny the existence of a collective and widespread ill feeling against the colonial state. But this manifestation fell short of rootedness in the feeling and conviction of a shared heritage and common destiny. It was artificial. It merely expressed feelings of anti-colonialism. As such it lacked sustainability after the attainment of independence. Regardless of the reasons often cited for the 1964 Cabinet Crisis, underneath was also the evaporation of this artificial nationalism in the absence of the common enemy.
A nation is also understood to be an imagined political community, imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign. It is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow members, meet them, or even hear about them, and yet in the mind of each exists the image of their communion. A nation is associated by a number of characteristics. Chief among these are territory, common language, unity of culture and tradition, and shared historical experiences. The significance of each of these, however, varies. Common historical experiences re very crucial as they are to do with the sharing of emotions concerning moments of common suffering and victory experienced collectively as a people. Common symbols and signs, grief and sorrows, victories and triumphs, national ceremonies, national days, colours, emblems, songs, veneration of political heroes, are very strategic in creating and sustaining a nation. To surmise the point, a nation is a political community of people who feel deeply rooted in the laws and results of history. This is based on common memory of, and feeling for the past. A nation is what individuals feel in their hearts, a kind of a soul, a spiritual principle. It is constituted of the past and present, i.e. the actual consent and desire to live together, the desire and will to continue to value the legacy and heritage held in common. In this case citizenship and nationality are not synonymous.

National language
The introduction and implementation of a national language in 1968 was premised on the realisation that Malawi was not yet sufficiently constituted and wielded together as a nation in the strict sense of the concept. Thus, common language alongside other factors, were seen to be instrumental in the creation of a meta-political consciousness. The imperative for a national language still remains to this day especially in the face of financial and technical constraints that make translation into diverse languages almost impossible. Let us first look at socio-economic development. Language plays a critical role in development. It is a vehicle that carries concepts and values about development. Through language these are transmitted to a broad spectrum of people. There are indicators to the effect that a number of countries that have moved fast from poverty to higher levels of development have common language as one of the key factors. In Malawi, it would be worthy examining the extent to which lack of common language is contributory to slow pace of development.
Again a national language is needed for purposes of citizens’ participation. Participation is one of the foundation stones of democratic governance. It is often said that people ought to take part in all the affairs that concern them. For this to happen, language is necessary. Common language easily facilitates national discourse. It provides space for citizens to take part in a national narrative.
The second national constitutional review conference itself is a testimony. There were instances when those fluent in English would resort to Chichewa in order to communicate to a wider audience. In the absence of a widely accepted and spoken language, a larger percent of the national population in Malawi is marginalised from the national narrative. A third point to seriously consider is national security. Globally, national language has increasingly become a critical factor to national security. Knowledge or readiness to learn a country’s national language is taken to be one of the key conditions that a foreigner applying for citizenship or long stay in a particular country is required to fulfil. These are some of the factors that need serious consideration when debating about the national language in Malawi. It is not useful to let the debate get coloured with parochial and short term tribal interests.
Not long ago, D.D. Phiri, a renown scholar, argued strongly for a national language. However, critical examination of his position shows elements of ambivalence. While he appears to be progressive and liberal in his acceptance of the need for a national language, he demonstrates strong reservations against the idea that that language should be known as Chichewa.
This is evident in his proposal to Christianise it into what he calls ChiMalawi. Phiri wants a neutral label while maintaining the same substance. Certainly, this cannot be without problems. The renaming would just create more confusion.
Apart from potential resistance, Chichewa language would continue to exist alongside ChiMalawi, without substantive difference. It would be typical of Dr. Livingstone’s tautology of calling Nyasa, Lake Nyasa!

Voice of Micah