Malawi Freedom Network 
Opinion by Issa Chimwala
Published by Malawi Freedom Network
Malawi has changed governments.
Malawi has changed presidents.
Malawi has changed political parties in power.
But the uncomfortable question is whether Malawi has actually changed its culture of political power.
There was a time when Malawians watched political influence increasingly revolve around the State President’s Office and the ruling party’s Secretary General.
Today, another configuration is attracting attention: the State President’s Office and a Deputy Minister.
And that should force Malawians to stop and ask a very uncomfortable question:
Are we changing governments—or simply changing the people occupying positions of influence?
This is not about attacking an individual.
It is about a much bigger issue: the concentration of political influence and what it does to democratic institutions.
Malawi embraced multiparty democracy with the promise that power would no longer be excessively concentrated in the hands of a few.
The promise was simple.
Institutions would matter.
Parliament would matter.
The courts would matter.
Political parties would have their role.
Government ministries would have their responsibilities.
And ultimately, the law—not personal connections—would determine how the country is governed.
But whenever political influence appears to become concentrated around a small circle, Malawians have every reason to ask questions.
Because democracy is not simply about holding elections every five years.
Democracy is also about how power is exercised between elections.
It is about whether public institutions can operate without undue political pressure.
It is about whether government positions remain institutions of the state rather than extensions of political networks.
And it is about whether citizens can access government because they are citizens—not because they know somebody close to power.
That is where the debate must begin.
WE HAVE SEEN THIS MOVIE BEFORE
Malawi’s political history contains enough lessons to make citizens uncomfortable.
Governments change, but the temptation to centralise influence does not disappear automatically.
A new administration can arrive promising institutional reform, accountability and a break from the past.
Then, slowly, the same political habits can return under different names and different faces.
That is why Malawians should not merely celebrate the arrival of a new government.
They should watch how power is organised.
Who has access?
Who makes decisions?
Who influences appointments?
Who speaks for government?
Who speaks for the party?
Where does party authority end and state authority begin?
And most importantly:
Who holds whom accountable?
These are not small questions.
They are the questions that determine whether a democracy is genuinely institutionalised or remains heavily dependent on personalities.
MALAWI NEEDS STRONG INSTITUTIONS, NOT STRONG INNER CIRCLES
The strength of a government should not be measured by how powerful its inner circle appears.
It should be measured by how effectively its institutions function.
A strong democracy does not require citizens to understand the President’s inner circle before they can understand how government works.
The rules should be clear.
Responsibilities should be clear.
Lines of authority should be clear.
Accountability should be clear.
When those boundaries become blurred, public confidence can suffer.
And once citizens begin believing that political proximity is more important than institutional procedure, democracy itself begins to lose credibility.
That is why this debate must go beyond personalities.
It must be about the Malawi we are building.
TODAY’S ARRANGEMENT CAN BECOME TOMORROW’S PRECEDENT
This is perhaps the most important point.
Political leaders eventually leave office.
Presidents leave State House.
Ministers leave Cabinet.
Party officials lose positions.
But precedents remain.
If one administration establishes a political culture that concentrates influence around a small group, another administration may inherit that culture—and use it even more aggressively.
The people who create the rules of political conduct today may therefore be creating the environment in which tomorrow’s leaders operate.
That should concern everyone.
Government supporters should care.
Opposition politicians should care.
Civil society should care.
Journalists should care.
And ordinary Malawians should care.
Because when political power becomes too concentrated, the ordinary citizen is usually the first person to feel the consequences.
MALAWI MUST ASK THE HARD QUESTIONS
We cannot continue pretending that changing political faces automatically means changing political culture.
It does not.
Real change means building institutions capable of surviving different presidents, different parties and different political seasons.
It means ensuring that public offices are governed by law and clearly defined responsibilities.
It means ensuring that political parties can pursue their political interests without compromising the independence of state institutions.
And it means creating a culture where accountability does not depend on whether the person being questioned belongs to your political camp.
Malawi does not need another generation of political worship.
It needs institutional discipline.
It does not need more powerful personalities.
It needs stronger institutions.
It does not need political arrangements that make citizens wonder who is really running what.
It needs clarity, transparency and accountability.
So, as Malawi moves forward, the question is not simply:
Who is powerful today?
The question is:
What kind of political system are we leaving behind for tomorrow?
Because if we keep changing the faces while preserving the same culture of concentrated political influence, then perhaps the uncomfortable truth is this:
Malawi may be changing governments—but it may not yet be changing the politics of power.
And that is a conversation the country can no longer afford to avoid.
— Issa Chimwala
Published by Malawi Freedom Network
Read also: CDEDI Yachenjeza: Chigamulo cha Supreme Court pa Finance Bank Chitha Kuipitsa Chuma cha Malawi
Read also: We Will Take the Matter to Court to Stop Chakwera from Continuing as MCP President – Major”
