By Burnett Munthali
In Malawi, discussions surrounding criticism, especially regarding public figures and their legacies, often spark heated debates. Recently, a notable example emerged when I began exposing issues related to Ralph SC. Initially, I was met with the common refrain, “You don’t speak bad about the dead.” However, as I turn my focus to a living judge whose reputation is allegedly being tarnished, I can’t help but question: “Which reputation are we talking about?”Lawyer and Human Rights Advocate Alexius Kamangila speaks out against threats
The notion of reputation is often cloaked in hypocrisy. When someone has passed away, especially a figure of prominence, there tends to be an unwritten rule to avoid criticism, regardless of their actions during their lifetime. This is particularly evident in the context of Ralph SC, where even factual discussions about his impact are met with emotional resistance. The argument suggests that once a person is deceased, any negative discourse is a sign of disrespect, regardless of the circumstances surrounding their legacy.Lawyer and Human Rights Advocate Alexius Kamangila to feature in Zodiak Exclusive tonight
Yet, when it comes to living individuals, the same standards of respect do not seem to apply. The current conversation around a judge accused of tarnishing his reputation illustrates this inconsistency. Critics are quick to label those who speak out as damaging to a figure’s reputation, but where was this concern when the same critics were admonishing me for discussing Ralph SC? It raises an important question about the selective nature of public outrage and the application of moral standardsLawyer Alexius Kamangila apologizes for communication disruption.
Accountability should not cease with death. If a public figure has left a legacy—positive or negative—those legacies must be examined critically. In the case of Ralph SC, we should not shy away from discussing the implications of his actions and the impact they have had on society. Similarly, living judges, politicians, and leaders must also be held accountable for their decisions and actions. The claim that one is tarnishing a reputation can often be a diversion from the real issues at hand.Alexius Kamangila addresses allegations of disrespect and arrogance in bold facebook post
Engaging in open discourse is crucial for the growth and development of any society. It allows for a thorough examination of issues and helps to foster a culture of accountability and transparency. If we continue to shield certain figures from criticism, we risk perpetuating a cycle of complacency that hinders progress.
The question then arises: why do we feel compelled to defend the reputations of some while condemning others? Shouldn’t our primary focus be on truth and integrity, regardless of whether the person in question is alive or deceased?Lawyer Alexius Kamangila exposes “Brotherhood” among judges in exclusive Zodiak Interview
As we navigate these complex discussions in Malawi, it is essential to maintain a consistent approach to criticism and reputation. The selective outrage and the differing standards applied to the living versus the deceased can stifle necessary conversations about accountability and justice.
So, when we speak of tarnishing a reputation, let us be clear: the integrity of our discussions should not depend on whether someone is alive or dead. Instead, we must prioritize honesty and openness in examining the legacies we inherit, fostering a culture where accountability is not a privilege for the few, but a standard for all.Lawyer and Human Rights Advocate Alexius Kamangila speaks out against threats
