By Suleman Chitera
Malawi is constitutionally governed by three equal arms of the State: the Executive, Parliament, and the Judiciary. In theory, this balance is meant to protect democracy, uphold justice, and safeguard citizens from abuse of power. In practice, however, one arm has increasingly become untouchable, unaccountable, and dangerously disconnected from the people it is meant to serve: the Judiciary.
Every five years, Malawians go to the polls. Presidents are voted in or out. Members of Parliament are replaced or renewed. Political power shifts, sometimes dramatically, reflecting the will of the people. Yet one institution remains largely unchanged, decade after decade, regardless of performance, public confidence, or the damage caused by its decisions. That institution is the Judiciary.
This imbalance is not accidental—and its consequences are now tearing at the social fabric of the nation.
An Unchanging Judiciary in a Changing Nation
Judges and senior judicial officers often serve for decades with minimal external review. While independence of the Judiciary is essential, independence must not be confused with immunity. In Malawi, judicial independence has increasingly been interpreted as freedom from accountability, even when decisions raise serious ethical, legal, and moral questions.
As society evolves, laws are interpreted through the same judicial mindset formed years—sometimes generations—ago. Meanwhile, economic pressures, corruption, inequality, and political manipulation have intensified. The result is a justice system that feels outdated, elitist, and detached from the daily struggles of ordinary Malawians.
Justice for the Rich, Punishment for the Poor
Public anger toward the Judiciary is not abstract; it is rooted in lived experience. Time and again, Malawians witness the same disturbing pattern:
- Politically connected individuals accused of stealing billions are granted bail, endless adjournments, or quietly acquitted.
- Poor citizens accused of stealing food, livestock, or survival items receive harsh sentences—five, six, or more years in prison.
This is not justice. This is class-based punishment masquerading as law.
When courts appear more sympathetic to wealth, power, and political influence than to poverty and desperation, public trust collapses. A Judiciary that consistently protects the powerful while criminalizing the poor becomes an accomplice to inequality.
Bail as a Shield for Corruption
Bail, intended as a constitutional right, has in many cases become a permanent escape route for corruption suspects. High-profile accused persons walk free for years, enjoying stolen wealth while cases crawl through the courts until public interest fades.
Justice delayed is justice denied—but in Malawi, delay has become strategy.
The perception, increasingly widespread, is that if you can afford top lawyers, influence investigators, or align yourself politically, the Judiciary will find a way to accommodate you. This perception alone is enough to destabilize a democracy.
Why Doesn’t the Judiciary Change?
Unlike the Executive and Parliament, the Judiciary is not subjected to regular democratic renewal. There are no term limits for judges. There is little public participation in appointments. Disciplinary mechanisms are opaque and rarely invoked.
As a result:
- Judges are rarely removed, regardless of performance.
- Institutional culture remains static.
- Public confidence is treated as irrelevant.
An institution that never changes eventually stops listening. And an institution that stops listening becomes dangerous.
The Cost to National Stability
When people lose faith in the courts, they stop believing in peaceful resolution of disputes. They begin to believe that the law is not for them. This creates fertile ground for lawlessness, mob justice, political violence, and social unrest.
A Judiciary that is perceived as biased does not calm society—it inflames it.
Malawi cannot build a stable future on a justice system that the majority distrusts.
Time for Serious Judicial Reform
Judicial independence must be protected—but it must be balanced with transparency, accountability, and reform. This includes:
- Clear performance reviews for judicial officers
- Transparent appointment and disciplinary processes
- Serious consequences for ethical misconduct
- Legal reforms that prioritize substance over technical loopholes
Reform is not an attack on the Judiciary. It is a rescue mission.
Conclusion: Justice Must Be Seen to Be Done
The Judiciary does not belong to judges. It belongs to the people of Malawi.
If the Judiciary continues to resist change while society demands fairness, it risks becoming irrelevant—or worse, an obstacle to democracy itself. A nation cannot move forward when justice stands still.
Malawians are not asking for favors. They are demanding fairness, accountability, and equality before the law.
And that demand can no longer be ignored.
