Malawi has just witnessed one of the most embarrassing moments in the history of its legal profession.
The Malawi Law Society has officially confirmed what many ordinary Malawians have been whispering for months: that it is no longer a professional association of lawyers, but a political grouping clad in borrowed legal gowns.
I have gone through their sensational press statement attacking President Professor Arthur Peter Mutharika for suspending Parliament and declaring that he has violated the Constitution. When I finished reading it, I asked myself a simple question: which Constitution are these learned friends referring to?
The hard truth is that President Mutharika has not broken any law. The hard truth is that the powers he exercised are expressly donated to his office by the Constitution itself.
Section 59 of the Constitution of Malawi is crystal clear. It grants the President authority to summon Parliament, to prorogue it, and to dissolve it.
Suspending a Session and paving way for a new Session is not an invention of Peter Mutharika. It is a well-established presidential prerogative. It has been there since 1994.
The hard truth is that this provision has been used by almost every President Malawi has had, and MLS never raised a finger.
Let us look at the record. The late Professor Bingu wa Mutharika, between 2010 and 2011, prorogued Parliament when his government faced political heat. He did it not once but multiple times. At that time, the Malawi Law Society existed. Its offices were open.
Its letterheads were intact. Yet it issued no condemnation. It never lectured Malawians on constitutionalism. It remained conveniently quiet.
Then came President Lazarus Chakwera. Between 2020 and 2025, his administration repeatedly adjourned, suspended and prorogued Parliament.
Sometimes it was justified as preparation for the State of the Nation Address, sometimes as budget alignment, sometimes as executive re-organisation.
The precedent is public. The Hansard is there. Did we hear the Malawi Law Society? No. There was absolute silence. No press release. No reminder about democracy being under threat. Nothing.
Now President Arthur Peter Mutharika invokes the exact same Section, under the exact same Constitution, for the exact same purpose, and suddenly the Malawi Law Society has discovered constitutional law, has discovered democracy, and has discovered its voice. One cannot help but ask: what has really changed? Is it the law, or is it the occupant of Sanjika Palace?
The hard truth is that the Malawi Law Society is intoxicated with politics.
It has taken a side. It is leaning heavily towards one political direction and it is no longer hiding it. This is dangerous for a body that is supposed to be the custodian of legal professionalism.
MLS was established under the Legal Education and Legal Practitioners Act as a professional regulatory body.
It is not a civil society organisation. It is not an opposition political party. It is not a grouping formed to fight the Democratic Progressive Party.
Its mandate is to protect the integrity of the legal profession, to promote rule of law consistently, without selecting which President to attack and which President to protect.
When an institution that should be blind to political colours starts choosing when to shout and when to keep quiet based on who is in power, it loses moral authority. It ceases to be a society of law. It becomes a society of political mercenaries.
The hard truth is that the recent press statement by MLS is empty. It lacks any legal merit.
Any first-year law student at the University of Malawi who ever passed through the corridors of Chancellor College would know that a serious legal opinion must cite the law. Which provision has been breached? Is it Section 59? Section 67? Section 88? The statement does not tell us.
It simply throws emotional words like concerned, breach, undermines democracy. Where is the case law? Where is the Supreme Court authority? Where is the High Court interpretation? There is none, because there is no violation.
If MLS genuinely believes the President has acted unconstitutionally, the honourable path is known: go to the Constitutional Court. File an action. Argue your case before judges.
Why rush to the media? Why issue a Facebook statement? Is it because they know that before a court of law, this argument would collapse on its first day?
The hard truth is that Malawians are asking a painful but necessary question: why is APM hated with such venom? Why is everything he does, even what is explicitly legal, turned into a national scandal?
Why is it that actions that were celebrated as wise leadership under Chakwera and tolerated as decisive under Bingu are now called constitutional violations under Peter Mutharika?
The hatred directed at this man is not normal. It defies legal logic. In this country today, it appears only God, the Creator, truly loves APM with an unconditional love.
Look around. Former President Joyce Banda dissolved Parliament. President Bakili Muluzi did it. No legal earthquake was created. The Constitution did not bleed.
Yet today, a routine suspension of the 52nd Session is being marketed as a coup against democracy. This is hypocrisy of the highest order.
The Malawi Law Society has exposed its own ignorance of the very Constitution it claims to defend.
It has exposed that some of its current leadership are not interested in law at all, but are using the prestige of the bar to settle political scores they failed to settle at the ballot box. That is why they must be called out without fear.
Malawi does not need a Law Society that is brave only when the President is named Peter Mutharika, and cowardly when the President is from another party. Malawi needs a Law Society that will tell every President the truth, at all times, consistently.
For this reason, this institution needs a complete overhaul. It needs self-introspection.
It needs to cleanse itself of political drunkards who have turned a noble profession into a political campaign tool. Its members must be reminded that the wig is a symbol of wisdom and neutrality, not a cover for political activism.
President Mutharika has not violated any Constitution.
What has been violated is the trust Malawians had that their lawyers would be fair, professional and impartial. The gown has lost its balance.
Feesback:+265992082424
*jonesgadama@gmail.com
Leave a Reply