LILONGWE-(MaraviPost)-The recent dissolution of the Malawi Parliament has sparked a wave of public opinion and debate on the need for constitutional and legislative reforms.
One of the key points raised is the accuracy of the legal provisions cited to justify the dissolution.
Observers have pointed out that Section 67(1) of the Constitution, “as amended in 2020,” should have been explicitly referenced in the statement issued by the Right Honourable Speaker.
They argue that without the phrase “as amended in 2020,” the citation is misleading, as the amendment was specifically introduced following the annulment of the 2019 presidential election, which necessitated the extension of Parliament’s life from the usual dissolution date of 20 March to 23 July.
Since the adoption of the 1994 Constitution, Parliament had traditionally dissolved on 20 March for electoral years such as 1999, 2004, 2009, 2014, and 2019.
The 2020 amendment to this timeline, following the court-ordered rerun of the 2019 elections, has therefore introduced a new precedent that must be acknowledged in official statements.
Beyond legal technicalities, some critics believe that the dissolution of Parliament itself poses challenges to democratic governance.
They argue that, just like the executive branch remains intact until a new president is sworn in, legislative officers should continue holding their posts until new office bearers assume their responsibilities.
Khumbo Bonzoe Soko has called for constitutional reforms that would ensure a more stable legislative framework, preventing such gaps in governance.
Another suggestion gaining traction is the reintroduction of the recall provision, which would empower citizens to hold their Members of Parliament accountable by removing them if they fail to deliver on their promises.
In addition, calls have been made to enact a law that increases the allocation of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) from the current 0.5% of national tax revenue and foreign grants to at least 10%.
Proponents argue that this would ensure more equitable and impactful development across all constituencies.
Language inclusivity has also been highlighted as a key issue, with some suggesting that local languages should be introduced in parliamentary deliberations to improve transparency and public understanding.
There are also proposals aimed at boosting female representation in Parliament, including the idea of requiring each MP to run with a gender-balanced running mate, ensuring that more women are elected.
Others have argued for strengthening parliamentary oversight by giving the legislature the absolute right to ratify all presidential appointees, including cabinet ministers, principal secretaries, and judges.
These suggestions reflect a broader push for a more accountable, inclusive, and effective parliamentary system that truly serves the interests of Malawians.
Concluding Analysis
The dissolution of Parliament on 23 July 2025 has reignited debates on the strength and functionality of Malawi’s legislative system.
While the current Constitution provides a framework for governance, the concerns raised highlight gaps that undermine the balance of power and citizen participation.
Reforms such as reinstating the recall provision, increasing CDF allocations, promoting gender equity, and enhancing parliamentary oversight could transform Parliament into a more responsive and people-centered institution.
As the country moves toward the September 2025 elections, these discussions present an opportunity to rethink the role of Parliament and ensure that future legislative frameworks reflect the democratic aspirations of all Malawians.