By Joana Moyo
Mr. President,
As you enjoy your private visit in South Africa, chances are your phone still receives Malawi’s online newspapers. If so, two recent stories should concern you more than any briefing note waiting on your desk at Kamuzu Palace.
They both point to one ministry.
The Ministry of Lands.
The first story comes from Area 26 in Lilongwe, where residents are appealing for your intervention in a dispute involving a private developer and land they regard as ancestral land.
The legal arguments can wait.
The more important question is this:
How did the land get into the hands of the investor in the first place?
Whenever communities are fighting to remain on land they have occupied for generations, questions about the allocation process inevitably arise. Who approved it? How was it approved? Was everything done properly?
Those questions become even more important when viewed alongside the second story.
And it is the second story, Mr. President, that should keep policymakers awake at night.
Just days earlier, reports emerged alleging chaos, opacity and irregular conduct within the Ministry of Lands itself.
The allegations are startling.
They suggest that critical decisions involving public land are increasingly being concentrated around the Office of the Commissioner of Lands. More remarkably, they allege that plot offer letters are being processed and printed outside normal institutional channels, with the Commissioner reportedly carrying a printer in his vehicle and issuing documentation from hotels, lodges and other locations away from the Ministry.
These are serious allegations.
They may be true.
They may be false.
But they are far too serious to be ignored.
In Malawi, Siku Transport is known for one thing: here today, there tomorrow; anywhere, anytime.
The unfortunate perception emerging from these reports is that land administration itself is beginning to resemble a Siku Transport operation—plot offers allegedly being processed anywhere, anytime and from virtually any location.
That perception alone should alarm the government.
Land administration is supposed to be institutional, predictable and accountable. Decisions concerning public land should be traceable to official processes, official offices and official records—not to whichever hotel, lodge or parking lot an official happens to occupy on a given day.
If these allegations are false, they deserve immediate rebuttal.
If they are true, they deserve immediate intervention.
Because land is not just another government commodity.
Land is power.
Land is wealth.
Land is heritage.
Land is one of the few public resources that, once improperly allocated, becomes extraordinarily difficult to recover.
This is why the Area 26 story matters.
It may well be a glimpse of the consequences of a larger problem.
A land administration system that loses transparency eventually produces disputes.
A land administration system that tolerates shortcuts eventually produces victims.
A land administration system that becomes concentrated around individuals rather than institutions eventually loses public confidence.
Mr. President, the Democratic Progressive Party has travelled this road before.
One of the lessons from 2020 was that perceptions of lawlessness can be politically devastating when left unanswered. Opponents do not need to manufacture scandals when the government appears unwilling to confront concerns already circulating in public.
Once beaten, twice shy.
If fingers of suspicion are pointing at specific officers within the Ministry of Lands, including the Commissioner of Lands, investigate.
If wrongdoing is found, act.
If the allegations are false, clear the names involved through a transparent inquiry.
Either way, silence is not an option.
The greatest service you can render your government and your party is not protecting individuals.
It is protecting institutions.
The Area 26 dispute may be a warning.
The allegations emerging from the Ministry of Lands may be the explanation.
And together they raise a troubling question:
Is public land still being administered in the national interest, or is it gradually being captured by shortcuts, private interests and administrative impunity?
When you return from South Africa, Mr. President, Malawians do not need speeches.
They need answers.
Before one day we wake up and discover that a handful of officials have not merely allocated plots, but have quietly mortgaged public confidence in the entire land administration system.
The warning lights are flashing.
Please do not wait for the engine to fail before opening the bonnet.
Yours sincerely,
Joana Moyo
Concerned Citizen
Feedback: moyojoana@gmail.com
