Malawi has long grappled with the shadow of corruption. Recent events, particularly the decision by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to drop high-profile corruption charges, have thrust the nation’s anti-corruption efforts into the spotlight.
Just a few weeks before Malawi’s vice president, Saulos Chilima, was killed in a plane crash, the DPP requested that his corruption case be discontinued on the grounds that it involved national security interests.
The country’s anti-corruption body and Chilima’s lawyers had been asking for disclosures from the country’s military authorities in a case where, it was alleged, he had assisted U.K.-based Malawian businessman Zuneth Sattar to win government contracts.
In October 2023, the High Court in Lilongwe summoned army generals to explain why they were not releasing documents connected to Chilima’s case, following complaints from anti-corruption officials that the generals were refusing to release documents connecting the vice president to the arms deal, suggesting he influenced the army to award the contract to Sattar.
Without prosecutors providing reasons for the decision to drop charges on May 6, the High Court discontinued Chilima’s case. A month later, Chilima and nine others were declared dead on June 11 after a military aircraft that they were on went missing, raising questions about how the plane crashed.
When President Lazarus Chakwera initially stripped Chilima of his duties in June 2022 due to the corruption charges, he also dismissed or suspended several high-profile officials and withheld some of the vice president’s powers after they were named in a corruption scandal.
At the time, the president’s decision raised hopes of accountability, signaling a bold step in Malawi’s fight against corruption. However, the subsequent dropping of these charges and several others including those of former President Bakili Muluzi have sparked skepticism, with many questioning the motives behind the decision and the integrity of the judicial process.
Malawi is plagued by a web of vested interests and power dynamics that often obscure the pursuit of justice. The intertwining of political allegiances, personal rivalries, and economic interests creates fertile ground for corruption to flourish, undermining the country’s development aspirations and exacerbating inequalities. Distinguishing between genuine anti-corruption efforts and political vendettas becomes increasingly challenging, blurring the lines between accountability and retribution.
Institutional weaknesses and political motivations often intersect, allowing corrupt actors to thrive. The lack of robust governance structures, coupled with the pervasive influence of political networks, further complicates efforts to root out corruption and promote transparency. For instance, the poor working relations between the country’s anti-graft agency, the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), and the DPP are a clear indicator that there is a problem. According to the ACB, the DPP did not consult it before dropping Chilima’s charges, and it only heard of the decision to discontinue the case through the media.
While Chakwera made dealing with graft one of his key campaign pledges in 2020 and has repeatedly spoken of his government’s commitment to bringing it to an end, dropping high-profile cases is an indication that he is finding it difficult.
The timing of the development is particularly telling, coming on the heels of Chakwera’s dismissal of the U.S. government’s sanctions against several former Malawian officials as laughable. Such dismissive remarks underscore the delicate balance between domestic accountability and international pressure in shaping Malawi’s anti-corruption narrative.
The former vice president’s death has left the country at a political impasse—with conspiracy theorists pointing fingers at Chakwera and the army and arguing that dropping Chilima’s case was a planned political maneuver. Other critics argue that the case exemplifies a pattern of selective justice, where high-profile figures may evade accountability while ordinary citizens bear the brunt of anti-corruption measures. This perception not only erodes trust in the government but also undermines the credibility of anti-corruption initiatives, fueling public suspicion and disappointment.
The dropped charges against Chilima serve as a litmus test for Malawi’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring equal treatment under it. The perception that individuals in positions of power can act with impunity sends a dangerous message to both citizens and foreigners, eroding confidence in Malawi’s government and hindering efforts to attract much-needed foreign investment. The consequences of such perceptions extend beyond politics, impeding progress toward sustainable development and reducing the public’s faith in the judicial system.
The decision not only raises doubts about the judiciary’s independence but also tests the resilience of Malawi’s democratic institutions in the face of entrenched corruption. Moses Mkandawire, chair for the National Alliance Against Corruption, has argued that Malawi’s fight against corruption favors high-profile individuals despite the president’s commitments to combat the vice without fear or favor. For instance, Mkandawire said the dropping of a corruption case in May 2023 against Muluzi, who was accused of diverting $11 million to his personal bank account while in office between 1994 and 2004, is an indication of selective justice.
“It’s extremely important that that person is brought before the courts of law because otherwise, we are just paying lip service to the fight against corruption,” Mkandawire told Voice of America.
Chakwera also pardoned a former minister of homeland security, Uladi Mussa, who was jailed in 2020 for corruption and hit with a U.S. travel ban, and he also pardoned another former minister, Henry Mussa, who was serving a nine-year jail term after being convicted of conspiracy to steal government property.
As Malawi navigates this critical juncture in its history, it must uphold the principles of justice, transparency, and accountability. Only by confronting corruption head-on, with unwavering determination and genuine commitment, can Malawi hope for a brighter, more prosperous future for all of its citizens.
Shutting down high-profile cases and exonerating people courts have found guilty signal to citizens that the government isn’t serious about fighting corruption, the academic George Phiri has argued.
Amid these challenges, civil society organizations will be critical to holding Malawi’s leaders accountable and safeguarding the integrity of the anti-corruption agenda. By advocating for transparency, mobilizing public support, and monitoring government actions, civil society organizations can play a pivotal role in fostering a culture of accountability and empowering citizens to demand change.
Ultimately, the fight against corruption in Malawi will require legal, political, and citizen action. It demands not only robust enforcement mechanisms and impartial judicial processes but also a fundamental shift in attitudes by public servants and societal norms. Foreign governments, nongovernmental organizations, and investors can also play a crucial role in fostering an anti-corruption culture in Malawi by actively supporting transparency initiatives, enforcing rigorous anti-corruption standards, and promoting accountability.
By providing financial and technical assistance to bolster local institutions dedicated to fighting corruption, they can pressure the Malawian government to adopt and implement more stringent anti-corruption measures, helping Malawi to chart a new course toward a future defined by justice, prosperity, and dignity for all its citizens.
The post Is Malawi’s Government Serious About Fighting Corruption? appeared first on Foreign Policy.
