A new twist has emerged in the parliamentary inquiry into the plane crash that killed Former Vice President Saulos Chilima and eight others.
The revelation came during testimony from Moses Nthakomwa, a close friend of Chilima.
Appearing before the inquiry, Nthakomwa challenged the official timeline of how information about the crash was handled.
“On the evening of 10 June 2024, people were still busy searching when information about the crash site and the state of fatalities was already known,” he told the committee.
His statement directly contradicts public assurances made in the immediate aftermath that the location and condition of the wreckage were only confirmed the following day.
The aircraft went down in Chikangawa Forest on 10 June 2024 while en route from Lilongwe to Mzuzu.
On board were Chilima, senior military officers, and crew members.
For more than 24 hours, the nation waited in anguish as search teams combed difficult terrain and bad weather hampered operations.
Nthakomwa’s claim suggests that key details were known to some individuals hours before they were communicated to the public and to the victims’ families.
The implications are significant for a probe already under intense public scrutiny.
Lawmakers on the committee pressed for clarity on who had the information, when they received it, and why it was not released sooner.
If substantiated, the testimony raises questions about transparency, coordination, and the handling of crisis communications by state institutions.
It also risks deepening mistrust among Malawians who have demanded full accountability for the tragedy.
The inquiry was set up to establish facts around the crash, assess the response, and recommend reforms to prevent future failures.
Until now, the focus has been on weather, aircraft maintenance, and search and rescue logistics.
Nthakomwa’s intervention shifts attention to the flow of information within government and security circles on the night of the crash.
International observers have been watching the process closely because the death of a sitting vice president is rare in African politics.
How Malawi manages the investigation will shape perceptions of its democratic institutions and its commitment to truth-telling.
Government officials have not yet responded directly to Nthakomwa’s specific allegation.
But pressure is mounting for the committee to subpoena records, call additional witnesses, and trace the chain of communication from the crash site.
For the families of the nine victims, the new detail adds another layer of pain to an already traumatic event.
They have repeatedly asked why it took so long to locate the plane and to confirm what happened.
The probe now faces a critical test: whether it can pursue this line of questioning without political interference.
Analysts say the credibility of the entire process may depend on how transparently the committee treats this “twist.”
As the inquiry continues, one thing is clear.
The question is no longer only about what caused the plane to crash, but also about what was known, when it was known, and who decided to keep it quiet.
Former Secretary to the President and Cabinet, Colleen Zamba, has now broken her silence on one of Malawi’s most sensitive national tragedies.
She appeared virtually before the same parliamentary committee investigating the June 2024 disaster.
The testimony marks the first time a senior government official directly addressed public criticism over how the state managed the immediate response.
For months, questions have lingered about delays in search operations, coordination between agencies, and communication to the public and the victims’ families.
Zamba told lawmakers that government acted within the limits of what was possible given the circumstances of the crash site and the weather conditions.
“We did our job as it was supposed to be done,” she said, pushing back against accusations of negligence and slow reaction.
The crash, which occurred in Chikangawa Forest, claimed the lives of Chilima, senior military officials, and crew members.
It sent shockwaves across Malawi and the region, given Chilima’s prominence as a reformist leader and potential presidential candidate.
In the aftermath, civil society, opposition parties, and ordinary Malawians demanded transparency and accountability from the Tonse government.
Zamba’s appearance suggests the administration is now trying to close the chapter on speculation by putting a senior voice on record.
She recounted the events of the day, detailing how alerts were received, how the military and aviation authorities were mobilized, and how search teams were deployed into difficult terrain.
According to her, the decision-making was guided by protocols for aviation emergencies and by advice from technical experts on the ground.
The committee is probing whether political considerations interfered with operational decisions, and whether enough was done in the first critical hours.
Zamba insisted that there was no deliberate delay and that every institution played its role as required by law.
Her defense comes at a politically charged time, with Malawi heading toward general elections and the memory of the crash still raw in public discourse.
Analysts say her testimony is as much about restoring public trust as it is about clearing the government of wrongdoing.
The use of a virtual appearance also drew comment, with some MPs questioning whether it signaled reluctance to face direct questioning.
But supporters argue it allowed Zamba to present a detailed account without the distractions of a packed hearing room.
Internationally, the handling of the crash has been watched closely because it involves the death of a sitting vice president, a rare event in African politics.
How Malawi investigates and accounts for the tragedy will shape perceptions of its institutions and its commitment to transparency.
Zamba’s statement that procedures were followed will now be weighed against evidence from the military, aviation authority, and other witnesses.
The parliamentary committee is expected to release findings that could recommend reforms in disaster response, aviation safety, and crisis communication.
For the families of the nine victims, the hearing offers a chance, however limited, to hear from those at the center of government decisions.
Whether Zamba’s defense will satisfy public demand for answers remains to be seen.
But with her testimony, the government has finally placed its most senior administrative voice on the record in defense of its actions.
Nearly two years after the tragic military plane crash of June 10, 2024, the voices of the widows left behind continue to echo across Malawi with growing urgency.
Their pain has not diminished with time.
Instead, it has evolved into difficult questions that the nation can no longer afford to ignore.
The recent appearance of the widows before a parliamentary ad hoc committee was not merely another procedural event.
It was a powerful reminder that grief becomes even more painful when accompanied by uncertainty.
Leading those questions was Mary Chilima, widow of the late Vice President.
She told the committee that her family, and the other families, deserve answers that go beyond sympathy.
Mary Chilima specifically asked: Who authorized the flight under the prevailing weather conditions?
She asked: Were all pre-flight safety and technical checks properly conducted and documented?
She asked: Why did it take so long for the public and families to be told the truth about the location of the wreckage?
She asked: Was there any breakdown in communication between the military, aviation authorities, and the Office of the President and Cabinet on the night of the crash?
She asked: What systems are now in place to ensure that such a tragedy never happens again?
Other widows echoed similar concerns.
They want to know if cost-cutting, political pressure, or institutional negligence played any role.
They want to know if the aircraft was airworthy and if the crew had adequate support.
Their demand is remarkably simple.
They want the truth.
Not speculation.
Not rumours.
Not political statements.
They want credible answers supported by evidence.
The passage of time has only intensified public curiosity surrounding the crash.
Questions that remained unanswered in June 2024 have not disappeared.
Instead, they have multiplied.
Every delay in providing clear findings creates fresh opportunities for misinformation.
It also deepens public mistrust in national institutions.
When governments fail to communicate openly after national tragedies, conspiracy theories often begin filling the information vacuum.
That reality is neither unique to Malawi nor new in democratic societies.
Around the world, aviation disasters involving government officials are subjected to extensive and transparent investigations.
Such investigations are not conducted merely to establish blame.
They are undertaken to protect public confidence and improve future safety.
The June 10 crash was no ordinary accident.
It claimed the life of the country’s Vice President together with several other distinguished citizens.
Its national significance demands exceptional transparency.
These are legitimate questions in any democratic society.
Seeking answers should never be mistaken for disrespecting the deceased.
On the contrary, establishing the truth is one of the greatest ways to honour those who lost their lives.
Accountability is not an attack on institutions.
It is what strengthens them.
Public institutions earn trust not by claiming perfection but by demonstrating honesty when mistakes occur.
The parliamentary inquiry therefore carries enormous national responsibility.
Its findings will shape not only public understanding of the crash but also future confidence in Malawi’s investigative processes.
If the inquiry is perceived as thorough, impartial and evidence-based, it could restore confidence that has steadily weakened over time.
If it falls short, public suspicion may become even more deeply entrenched.
For the widows, however, this is not primarily about politics.
It is about closure.
Every unanswered question prolongs emotional suffering.
Every unexplained detail delays healing.
Every missing fact keeps painful memories alive.
Justice is not measured only in courtrooms.
It is also measured by whether grieving families receive truthful explanations about the deaths of their loved ones.
No compensation package can replace that.
No official speech can substitute for factual answers.
The nation should therefore resist reducing the widows’ testimony to another political headline.
Their appearance before Parliament represents the human face of a national tragedy.
Behind every statistic is a family forever changed.
Behind every investigation is a child growing up without a parent.
Behind every delayed answer is another night of uncertainty for those left behind.
History shows that countries become stronger when they confront painful truths rather than conceal them.
Transparency may expose uncomfortable realities.
But secrecy often creates even greater damage.
The widows have reminded Malawi that time alone does not heal every wound.
Some wounds require truth before healing can begin.
As the parliamentary inquiry progresses, the country has an opportunity to demonstrate that no life lost in service to the nation is forgotten.
The burning questions raised by Mary Chilima and the other widows are therefore not theirs alone.
They belong to every Malawian who believes that public accountability, institutional transparency and respect for human dignity must remain the foundation of democratic governance.
Only a credible search for the truth will finally provide the answers that grieving families—and the nation itself—have waited far too long to hear.
Feedback: +265884433313
Email: bonnetmunthali2101@gmail.com
Leave a Reply