From Reform Rhetoric to Institutional Disruption: A Test of the New DPP
By Tagamchira Meeklem Chiperesa
When the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) returned to government, expectations were high. In his post-election address, President Arthur Peter Mutharika delivered a confident promise: “The mighty DPP is back… we wanted change; we expect change. I promise you real change—zinthu zisintha.” That declaration positioned the administration as one determined to govern differently.
However, months into the new term, a series of abrupt redeployments across the security sector, civil service, and state corporations has raised doubts about whether this promised transformation reflects genuine reform or a familiar pattern of political interference.
Senior Malawi Defence Force (MDF) officers, including Major Generals Chikunkha Soko and Francis Kakhuta Banda, have been reassigned to state enterprises as “directors of security.” Police commissioners faced similar transfers into civilian roles, only for the process to be stalled by a court injunction. CEOs of water boards, energy institutions, and other parastatals were instructed to leave their offices and take up lecturing roles at public universities. In many cases, acting executives have taken over their previous positions, effectively doubling costs and disrupting continuity. District Commissioners have also been reshuffled without clear justification.
Government maintains that the changes are part of public sector reform. However, the extent and speed of the deployments have prompted a critical question: why is the Executive driving decisions that legally fall under independent boards, commissions, and governing councils?
Universities determine academic staffing through their councils and senates. Parastatals are governed by boards responsible for recruitment, oversight, and discipline. The military and police operate under strict command structures meant to safeguard professionalism. Executive overreach in these spheres risks weakening these established frameworks.
Governance and labour experts have publicly cautioned against the approach. Labour analyst Benedicto Kondowe told Nation Publications Limited that sudden redeployments threaten operational stability and weaken institutional authority. Education policy expert Dr. Steve Sharra told Zodiak Broadcasting Station that appointing executives as lecturers risks diluting academic standards, noting that “lecturing is not a dumping ground.” Civil society governance specialist Martha Kwataine described the moves as “institutional overreach,” warning that Executive-driven redeployments undermine checks and balances essential in any democratic system.
These observations reflect growing fears that the redeployments may serve political rather than administrative interests.
