CIVICUS discusses Malawi’s presidential election results with Michael Simon Kaiyatsa, Executive Director of the Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation, a civil society organisation that promotes democracy, good governance and human rights.

The 16 September election saw former president Peter Mutharika return to power. His victory over incumbent President Lazarus Chakwera was decisive, but there were significant concerns about transparency and institutional independence in the electoral process. Civil society and international observers highlighted delays in publication of results, allegations of irregularities and politically motivated violence during the campaign, reflecting ongoing civic space challenges in Malawi.

Why did Mutharika win?

Mutharika’s victory reflects a combination of structural, political and psychological factors in a context of growing fatigue and disillusionment with the outgoing administration. Many voters associated him with a previous period of relative macroeconomic stability, particularly in comparison with the inflation, fuel shortages and governance failures under the current government. Perceptions of economic competence were central to his comeback, with nostalgia overshadowing the reality of his previous term’s shortcomings.

His earlier government faced criticism for weak leadership and corruption, but people still viewed him as the safer choice. For many, this election was not about ideology or policy alternatives, but a way to punish the incumbent for the hardship they’re experiencing. Mutharika received 56.8 per cent of the vote compared with 33 per cent for Chakwera.

What role did civil society play?

Civil society played a crucial role in promoting transparency and preventing violence. Through networks such as Chisankho Watch and the Civil Society Elections Integrity Forum, civil society deployed observers, conducted parallel vote tabulations and led peace campaigns to reduce tensions. Organisations such as the Centre for Human Rights and Rehabilitation, the National Initiative for Civic Education Trust and the Public Affairs Committee worked alongside the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC) to provide voter education, monitor political violence and mediate local disputes.

These interventions helped maintain a sense of calmness in an otherwise politically charged environment. Civil society also used early warning systems to track hate speech and online disinformation, which helped defuse tensions before they escalated.

However, it faced funding limitations. While over a hundred civil society groups were accredited to conduct civic and voter education, only a few received proper financial support, mostly through the United Nations Development Programme.

What concerns were raised about electoral transparency, and what reforms are needed?

While the election was largely peaceful, there were significant concerns about transparency and communication of results. Allegations of pre-marked ballot papers, delayed result transmission and inconsistent updates from the MEC raised doubts among voters. Reports that some media outlets were told to stop showing live result dashboards further eroded public confidence.

Reforms to strengthen the MEC’s independence and transparency are essential to restore trust. Commissioner appointments and budgets should be independent from executive influence and determined through a more consultative and merit-based process. Malawi also needs clearer, faster systems for verifying and publishing results and resolving electoral disputes outside the courts.

Campaign finance and media reforms are equally important. The government must prevent the misuse of state resources during campaigns and enforce financial disclosure rules. Given that independent media is essential to rebuilding confidence in elections, the government must ensure the editorial independence of public broadcasters.

What challenges does the new government face?

Mutharika faces an uphill battle. The economy is struggling under high public debt, limited fiscal space and rising unemployment. People expect quick improvements, but the government has narrow room to manoeuvre. One of the biggest tests will be balancing economic recovery with social expectations.

Corruption is another major challenge. Several members of the new cabinet face corruption-related charges, raising doubts about the government’s credibility. To regain public trust, the government will need to prove its anti-corruption drive is genuine and not selective or rhetorical.

Malawi is deeply divided along regional and partisan lines. It will need inclusive leadership that prioritises consensus and service over political loyalty to heal these divisions and build national unity and trust in institutions.

What did the election reveal about the state of democracy in Malawi?

On the positive side, the peaceful transfer of power revealed the resilience of democratic institutions. The calm election and the judiciary’s independent handling of disputes demonstrated that key democratic safeguards still work. However, politicisation of state institutions persists, particularly in the MEC, security services and state media, and institutional effectiveness often depends on political goodwill rather than constitutional protections.

Mutharika’s return to power is cause for concern because his previous term was marked by hostility towards human rights organisations, protest restrictions and attempts to silence dissent. If such patterns return, civic space could narrow through administrative pressure, politicised enforcement of the NGO Act or harassment of critical voices.

Civil society will need to remain vigilant and united. It should continue to cooperate with the government around shared priorities such as governance reforms, social protection and youth participation. But engagement should not come at the expense of independence or watchdog roles. Ultimately, Malawi’s democratic future will depend both on holding periodic elections and fostering a civic culture that values accountability and citizen participation.