BALLOTS BEFORE THE BALLOT: Why Malawi’s Primaries Matter
By Osman Bwanali
In Malawi, where democracy is still evolving, primary elections are often treated as internal party affairs. But beneath the surface, these primaries carry significant implications—not only for the political parties but for the country’s democratic future. They shape the choices voters will have on the final ballot and determine whether those choices are meaningful or merely a formality.
Ideally, primary elections are meant to democratize political parties from within. They offer a platform for emerging leaders, promote internal accountability, and allow grassroots supporters to have a say in who represents them. Done right, primaries build trust between political parties and the electorate. Unfortunately, Malawi’s experience has been quite the opposite.
In many cases, party elites handpick candidates behind closed doors. Rules are selectively applied, and transparency is sacrificed for political convenience. Disputes are frequent, often leading losing candidates to run as independents or defect to rival parties—weakening party cohesion and fragmenting electoral outcomes.
A recent and revealing case is that of Vitumbiko Mumba, the current Minister of Trade and a longtime loyalist to President Lazarus Chakwera. Mumba, who has worked tirelessly to promote the MCP agenda, faced a shocking defeat in the party’s primary election in Mzimba Central. His challenger was none other than Adamson Kuseri Mkandawire, a close aide to the president. Mkandawire’s victory, however, came amid violent scenes and legal controversy.
The election day was marred by chaos, with violence erupting at polling centers. Eyewitnesses described scenes of panic as voters fled for safety. Allegations quickly followed, accusing Mumba of dispatching gangs armed with pangas to disrupt the vote when it became clear he was losing. The matter escalated to court, with injunctions filed to halt the results, citing intimidation, irregularities, and threats to voter safety.
This incident is a stark example of how Malawi’s primary elections have become battlegrounds for influence rather than platforms for democratic expression. It also raises serious questions about fairness when presidential aides are allowed to contest against sitting ministers in the same party, under what some allege are skewed conditions.
Moreover, the violence and legal battles surrounding Mumba’s loss highlight the urgent need for political parties to reform their internal election systems. If parties cannot ensure peaceful, transparent, and fair primaries, how can they be trusted to govern with democratic principles?
Primary elections also mirror broader issues of inclusion and inequality. Women, youth, and marginalized groups often lack the resources to compete fairly. Some parties have introduced reforms like reduced nomination fees, but these remain token gestures in the absence of structural change.
The path forward requires more than lip service. Parties must adopt transparent nomination processes, enforce rules uniformly, and create independent appeals systems that function swiftly and fairly. Only then can primaries become what they were meant to be: a foundational exercise in democracy, not a source of disillusionment.
