Malawi must stop confusing the constitutional right to demonstrate with an unrestricted licence to intimidate citizens, paralyse businesses, destroy property and expose innocent people to danger.
Freedom of assembly is a constitutional right, but nobody has a constitutional entitlement to turn public anger into anarchy.
The Human Rights Defenders Coalition (HRDC) now faces a serious institutional credibility test following its deregistration by the Non-Governmental Organisations Regulatory Authority (NGORA), effective November 3, 2026.
The decision came days after the organisation announced nationwide demonstrations scheduled for November 17, demanding the resignation of Energy Minister Jean Mathanga over persistent fuel shortages and electricity blackouts.
The confrontation raises fundamental questions about institutional accountability, financial transparency, the responsibilities of protest organisers and the price ordinary Malawians repeatedly pay when demonstrations descend into violence.
Accountability Must Begin at Home
NGORA says HRDC failed to submit audited financial statements and annual returns for 2023, 2024 and 2025, and failed to notify the regulator of changes to its board and governance structure.
These are not minor administrative inconveniences. Financial accountability is fundamental to public trust, particularly for organisations that demand transparency and integrity from public institutions.
How can an organisation position itself as an uncompromising defender of accountability while facing questions about its own statutory reporting obligations?
Can an organisation demand transparency from government while failing to demonstrate the same standards in its own administration?
These are uncomfortable but legitimate questions HRDC must answer.
According to NGORA, HRDC was granted an extension until July 31, 2026, to submit the outstanding documents. The regulator subsequently confirmed that 36 NGOs had been deregistered for non-compliance.
HRDC has every right to challenge the decision in court. However, its judicial review application must be determined independently. Equally, the regulator must demonstrate that it acted lawfully and followed the applicable procedures.
Importantly, deregistration does not automatically extinguish the constitutional rights of individual Malawians to assemble and demonstrate. However, HRDC’s authority to operate and organise in its institutional capacity raises separate legal questions that must be resolved through the appropriate legal processes.
Constitutional freedoms must never be confused with institutional immunity.
The 2019 Protests Must Never Be Forgotten
Malawians have long memories, and the 2019 post-election demonstrations provide an important warning about what can happen when mass mobilisation becomes violent and public order breaks down.
Let us be honest: those demonstrations attracted considerable public support because many citizens genuinely questioned the management of the 2019 elections. Afrobarometer reported that 60 percent of Malawians who were aware of the demonstrations considered them justified.
However, public support for a cause did not amount to public approval of violence.
The protests were repeatedly marred by looting, property destruction, clashes with police, the burning of vehicles and damage to public infrastructure.
The United Nations’ 2019 reporting documented incidents involving the burning of police vehicles, police offices and government offices.
Businesses also suffered. Shops were looted, commercial activities disrupted and ordinary entrepreneurs left counting the cost of destruction they had neither organised nor benefited from.
In October 2019, a police officer was stoned to death during demonstrations in Msundwe following clashes involving police and protesters. Freedom House reported that four protesters were charged in connection with the officer’s death.
This tragedy must never be reduced to a political talking point. A human life was lost, and the incident illustrates the potentially devastating consequences of violence during public demonstrations.
It would be inaccurate to suggest that HRDC’s leadership ordered every violent act or that every demonstrator participated in criminal conduct. Individual criminal responsibility must be established through evidence and due process.
Nevertheless, organisers cannot simply mobilise crowds, enjoy the political attention and then distance themselves from the foreseeable risks associated with mass mobilisation.
Who Pays When Protests Turn Violent?
Certainly not the political activists who address press conferences.
Certainly not the individuals who deliver political speeches from comfortable offices.
The people who pay are the market traders whose merchandise is looted, the shop owners whose premises are vandalised, the transport operators whose vehicles are damaged and the ordinary workers who cannot reach their workplaces because roads have been blocked.
They include parents struggling to provide for their families, patients requiring urgent medical attention and small business owners whose daily income disappears when commercial activity comes to a standstill.
But the damage extends far beyond broken windows, burned vehicles and destroyed merchandise.
Violent demonstrations can undermine investor confidence, interrupt commercial supply chains, discourage business activity and deepen the economic hardships of communities already struggling with rising living costs.
Who compensates the innocent business owner whose premises are destroyed? Who restores the livelihood of a trader whose merchandise is looted? Who takes responsibility for the financial losses suffered by workers and transport operators?
These are questions protest organisers cannot continue to avoid.
The right to demonstrate must never become the right to destroy another person’s livelihood.
The Fuel Crisis Is Real, but So Is the Responsibility to Protest Peacefully
To be fair, HRDC has identified genuine public frustrations.
Fuel shortages have subjected motorists to lengthy queues, while electricity blackouts have disrupted businesses, households and essential services.
The government and the Ministry of Energy owe Malawians credible explanations, practical solutions and measurable improvements.
Energy Minister Jean Mathanga must be prepared to answer legitimate questions about the country’s energy challenges.
However, demanding her resignation does not automatically provide a solution to Malawi’s fuel supply problems.
Would removing the minister immediately guarantee uninterrupted fuel supplies? Would it automatically resolve electricity blackouts? Would it address weaknesses in procurement, distribution and energy infrastructure?
Malawians deserve answers to these questions.
The country needs a comprehensive energy recovery strategy, not merely a political contest over who occupies the ministerial office.
Equally, government shortcomings must never become an excuse for violence, destruction or intimidation.
Where Is the Responsibility of the Protest Organisers?
HRDC’s leadership must understand that announcing demonstrations is only one part of organising a public gathering.
Organisers have a responsibility to promote discipline, communicate clear expectations of peaceful conduct and take reasonable measures to prevent violence.
Where are the designated demonstration coordinators? What arrangements have been made to communicate with the police? How will organisers discourage looting, vandalism and attacks on innocent citizens? What emergency arrangements will protect vulnerable people?
These are not unreasonable questions. They are basic expectations of responsible civic leadership.
HRDC must publicly condemn violence, instruct participants to respect public and private property, and make it clear that anyone engaging in criminal conduct does not represent peaceful demonstrators.
There is also an important distinction between HRDC’s planned demonstrations and the separate protests announced by the Concerned Citizens of Malawi–People Power Movement. The latter’s decision to suspend its parallel demonstrations to pursue dialogue demonstrates that civic mobilisation can be reconsidered when alternative avenues deserve attention.
HRDC should understand that determination is not the same as responsibility.
November 17 Will Test HRDC’s Credibility
The November 17 demonstrations will test whether HRDC is genuinely committed to constitutional activism or whether confrontation has become its preferred political language.
The organisation must demonstrate that its campaign is about addressing public grievances rather than creating disorder or turning public frustration into political theatre.
The Malawi Police Service must equally discharge its constitutional responsibilities professionally. Police officers must protect peaceful demonstrators, prevent criminal activity and safeguard businesses, motorists and innocent residents.
They must also avoid excessive force, indiscriminate arrests and unnecessary confrontations.
Government must not use HRDC’s deregistration as an excuse to suppress legitimate criticism. Equally, HRDC must not use constitutional freedoms as an excuse to evade institutional accountability.
The courts must independently determine the legal dispute between HRDC and NGORA.
My position is straightforward: Malawi needs watchdogs, not untouchable watchdogs; accountability activists, not self-appointed custodians of public morality; and peaceful demonstrations, not street battles that leave innocent citizens paying the price.
Government must fix the fuel and electricity problems. HRDC must account for its institutional obligations. Protest organisers must protect the rights and safety of the public. The police must enforce the law professionally.
Nobody should be above accountability.
If HRDC wants to defend the rights of Malawians, it must demonstrate that it respects their property, safety, livelihoods and constitutional freedoms, including the freedom to go about their daily business without intimidation.
Human rights are not a licence for lawlessness. Activism is not immunity from accountability. And public frustration must never become a business opportunity for political confrontation.
Feedback:+265884433313
Email: bonnetmunthali2101@gmail.com
Leave a Reply