Malawians will go to the polls on September 16 to vote for the president and Members of Parliament. At this juncture, Malawi finds itself in an unenviable environment with questions about the impartiality of its electoral commission, and the protection of rights critical for a credible, free and fair election, including freedom of expression, association and assembly.
Echoes of Malawi’s contentious 2019 election still reverberate. In a landmark judgment, Malawi’s Constitutional Court nullified the 2019 presidential election due to widespread irregularities, becoming only the third African country to nullify a presidential election, after Côte d’Ivoire in 2010 and Kenya in 2017.
The judgment, which was scathing of the conduct of the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) in its management of the election, was hailed as a triumph for democratic accountability and electoral justice.
As things stand today, Malawi’s electoral landscape presents a stark paradox: on one hand, the memory of judicial courage and reform following the 2019 annulled elections; on the other, a deepening crisis of confidence that threatens to reverse those very gains.
The warning signs of voter apathy, political violence, contested electoral authority, unequal campaign conditions and biased media coverage are symptoms of a democratic system under strain.
Malawi teeters on the brink of regression in terms of governance. Reports of politically motivated violence have surged. In one of the most brazen incidents, on June 26, 2025 the police stood by as weapon-wielding men attacked demonstrators calling for an independent audit of the voters’ roll and the resignation of top electoral commission officials.
Civil society groups and opposition parties allege that those behind the political violence have links to a youth militia aligned to the ruling Malawi Congress Party, though the party has denied such claims.
In November 2024, opposition parties and civil society organizations had alleged that the governing party had organized the violent attack by masked men with weapons on a demonstration urging electoral reforms. At that time, as at the June 26 protests, witnesses said that law enforcement officers stood by while the masked men assaulted peaceful protesters.
The police’s apparent unwillingness to intervene to stop the violence – or to arrest those responsible, even when their identities were known – raises grave concerns about the government’s ability to conduct the September general election in a fair and impartial manner. The authorities’ muted response to attacks on civil liberties risks normalizing impunity that could undermine the country’s hard-won democratic gains.
At the heart of the storm lies the national electoral commission. Civil society groups and opposition parties have raised alarm over the composition of the commission’s secretariat and perceived political affiliations of its leadership. The commission’s top management remains in the hands of people widely believed to have strong links to the governing party. This has proved detrimental to the credibility of the MEC as a fair and impartial arbiter.
The commission’s refusal to allow local organizations access to inspect the voters’ rolls has raised concerns about the fairness of the process. And the commission’s adoption of Smartmatic technology, intended to modernize the electoral process, has instead sparked concerns due to a lack of transparency.
Voter registration figures are equally troubling. Of the estimated 10.9 million eligible voters, only 7.2 million have registered. This glaring gap may reflect inadequate civic education and raises concerns about voter apathy.
Malawi’s Political Parties Act of 2018 remains toothless, especially on campaign financing. The governing party has allegedly exploited state resources for campaign purposes, while opposition parties struggle with unequal access to public funds.
Meanwhile, the governing party is perceived to have in effect captured the state-funded Malawi Broadcasting Corporation, evidenced by its skewed coverage and denying airtime to dissenting voices.
In July, the Malawi Chapter of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (Misa) and the Media Council of Malawi issued a joint statement reminding the MBC leadership to “adhere to the Communications Act (2016) that mandates the outlet to be balanced and objective in its coverage of news, including political discourse.”
The governing party’s monopoly of the state media is not only incompatible with Malawi’s laws, but also the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections, which call for “equal opportunity for all political parties to access the state media” during the campaign period.
Malawi’s democratic story need not end in disappointment. The reforms initiated after 2019 proved that reform is possible.
But for that momentum to continue, democracy-supporting institutions such as the judiciary, the police and the executive need to uphold the integrity of the elections. Political leaders should denounce violence in all forms.
And the government needs to ensure the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, including for those seeking electoral justice.
International and regional stakeholders should publicly press for elections that meet international standards before the entire process descends into disarray.
Without urgent and coordinated responses from domestic institutions and regional actors, Malawi risks descending into a cycle of contested legitimacy and democratic decay.
They should urgently call for an environment free of intimidation, harassment and violence. They should also urge the government of Malawi to observe its own laws, and to implement the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections and the African Union’s African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance.
With sustained support, vigilant observation and a recommitment to electoral fairness, Malawi can reaffirm its place as a regional exemplar of democratic resilience. The time to act is now, while the promise of credible, peaceful and participatory elections can still be upheld.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Human Rights Watch (HRW).