Malawi’s election season is in full swing. Campaign rallies fill the air, posters splash colour across dusty roads, and promises echo through bustling markets. In most places, there’s a campaign rally or another almost every single day.

Seventeen candidates are vying for the presidency on September 16. Among them are heavyweights like incumbent Lazarus Chakwera (Malawi Congress Party), former President Peter Mutharika (Democratic Progressive Party), and Joyce Banda (People’s Party).

There are also challengers to the status-quo like Michael Usi, Dalitso Kabambe, Kondwani Nankhumwa and Atupele Muluzi, as well as a rather long list of fringe candidates.

It feels vibrant, competitive and exciting. But scratch the surface, and the disconnect is stark.

The candidates’ visions, often teeter along issues of social, economic or political transformation, on legacies, on presidential powers, and other fixes (ending nepotism, helping the youth, curbing tribalism) which sound easier to spell out than implement.

All very well and good. But in reality, if you analyse the political promises made to Malawians in the last decade, some of the things Malawi’s politicians have been saying are miles away from what Malawi’s poor desperately need: real change to break free from poverty and reclaim dignity.

Over the last decade, I’ve written on Malawiace.com about the country’s challenges: poverty, corruption, unemployment, inequality, centralization, poor resource mismanagement, mediocrity, accountability and such-like. And most of the Malawians I have discussed these issues with in this period wholly agree about our country’s problems. But where we disagree is on what is most urgent. i.e. what needs to be done now for the 70% of Malawians who are still living below the poverty line?

Promises, Promises
Chakwera promises 3 million jobs by 2030 – up from his 2020 pledge of 1 million, which no one has been able to show definitively how that promise was fulfilled. He points to roads and bridges as proof of progress, infrastructure which truth be told, has transformed parts of the country, in particular the central region – much of it in Lilongwe. Critics call these interventions “band-aids”. Ma plastala. Although to be fair to Chakwera the infrastructure in Malawi needed an overhaul.

Mutharika, at 85, leans on his past stint as president, vowing economic recovery, and a return to “stability”. His running mate, Jane Ansah, brings ‘baggage’ in the form of controversy from the disputed 2019 elections – over which she presided. Joyce Banda, Malawi’s first female president, promises women’s empowerment and global partnerships. She says she already has partners lined, waiting to help Malawi. Michael Usi, known for his grassroots appeal, is focusing on rural development, a unity government that includes politicians of all persuasions, and on anti-corruption. Dalitso Kabambe talks economic overhaul, district empowerment and curbing of spending on the civil service and OPC. Finally, Atupele Muluzi talks innovation and youth empowerment. Fringe candidates add their voices, but the chorus is pretty much the same: jobs, roads, schools, hospitals, cheap fertiliser, cheap cement, capital and economic transformation.

It sounds good from a campaign platform. It resonates when booming from loud-speakers at a campaign rally. But over 70% of Malawians live on less than $2.15 a day. Inflation bites every month, fuel scarcity aftects them too frequently, and floods displace thousands every other year.

So these lofty promises made from the campaign stages can feel hollow, when put against what people need, today, right now. Chakwera’s job targets? Youth unemployment is still at 23%. People are borrowing money to buy food right now. Mutharika’s stability claims conveniently ignore the corruption scandals of his term. Norman Chisale and company haven’t gone away. Joyce Banda’s global ties didn’t deliver lasting change before, why should they deliver now? New faces like Usi and Kabambe rely on charisma, not solid track records.

The Problem? It’s Not About the People

What nobody tells you, but which everyone knows is that candidates want power, party loyalty and quick wins. Their promises are crafted in Lilongwe, far from the struggles of rural villagers or urban slum dwellers. If any of the candidates truly wanted to orchestrate change, they would have started foundations and begun that work, across the country long time ago. Unrestricted by the machinery and bureaucracy of Government.

For example, Joyce Banda doesn’t need to be in government to launch some of the projects she has talked about in her campaign rallies. So what are her reasons for not launching them since 2020? Similarly, some of Atupele Muluzi’s ideas on Youth Empowerment can be implemented through cooperatives… or using private companies. It would probably be quicker to do so, than waiting for parliament to pass some laws, and some department to gazette some decree.

What the People Need: A Government That Listens
Picture a farmer in Nsanje, tilling dry soil, watching crops fail. Her children walk miles to a school with no books. The clinic lacks medicine. This is daily life for millions. Poverty isn’t merely a statistic – it’s a grind that steals dignity, from real breathing people. With real lives.

What’s needed? Not more promises, but actual change. We all agree that tackling corruption is important, not only as a moral issue that deprives the government of billions of dollars meant for the people, but as a necessary developmental imperative. So, yes let’s have independent audits in each government department, let’s have whistleblower protections, and asset recovery as standard.

But Malawi’s parliament has this far been somewhat reluctant to legislate and hold votes on some of these things. Chakwera’s MP’s didn’t table a bill in 5 years that tried to formalise these things, as essential as they are for a fledgling democracy. Neither did the parliaments during Peter Mutharika’s or Joyce Banda’s presidencies. What happened for example to that grand issue about reducing the power of the presidency? Remember that hugely publicized campaign promise?

So, why not try a different approach? Suppose just seven (7) of the 17 presidential candidates vying for political office got together, right now, and decided to begin working to tackle some of these problems…?

Several candidates have highlighted in their campaign speeches how they want to implement decentralisation. What we’ve seen from the past is that Malawi’s centralized system concentrates decisions in Lilongwe, and local needs are simply ignored. This affects certain areas who don’t see any developmental initiatives. And unlike countries where there’s a formula for fairly distributing state resources (like the Barnett formula in the UK), Malawi doesn’t have such a tool. So some places have not seen any meaningful form of development in 40 years. Of course this has the effect of entrenching poverty…

Devolved powers would let districts address their own challenges, from roads to farming cooperatives. Here, Dalitso Kabambe is right. But do you really have to be in government to roll-out a nation-wide project that empowers farmers? Or that helps fishermen? Fish farming can be done in cooperatives across the whole country, all 29 districts. It can be funded by…a consortium of … anyone who decides to join.

Similarly, with economic empowerment. Malawi’s resources, – tobacco, tea, uranium, bauxite, rubies… and more recently rare earths & graphite – will continue to enrich foreign firms. Foreign companies and their shareholders will continue to be the real beneficiaries, because contract re-negotiation after contract re-negotiation doesn’t seem to achieve much change for poor Malawians.

So why not form a National Mining Company of Malawi that takes on the job of mining some of our mining interests, processing them within Malawi, and exporting them to buyers as finished, or near-finished products? Again, this is something which six or seven of the presidential candidates would be able to form and push, if they put their minds to it, and if their true intentions for standing was truly public service.

They would be able to demonstrate to the people, outside of government, how they intend to transform the country, when in government. Working together would help them supercharge the efficacy of their individual resource pools. The organisation would help preserve local resources, improve skills training and earn Forex.

And it’s not that difficult. These days you can buy manufacturing or processing equipment for extractive industries from Asia. You then apply for licenses, get the equipment shipped, find skilled employees – who can be trained by the equipment’s manufacturers, get electric power connected, and in a few months you’re good to go.

But when you ask these things, the response is usually along the lines of ‘even if we tried to do it outside government, the minister in charge would block us, and make it difficult for us to operate‘.

So, you’re saying the attitude of the people in charge is they would rather have Sovereign Metals, Lotus Resources or Paladin mine our minerals resources, and make profits for their shareholders in Australia and the UK, than a locally owned company exploiting the resource locally?!? But why didn’t you do something about this issue the last time YOU were in government? To which you’ll be met with another excuse.

Within Education and Health too, the people’s needs are evident but summarily ignored for all to see. While Educational & Healthcare policy respectively requires formulation by government, helping Schools acquire educational resources or mobilising medical resources and organising medical staff from abroad (to volunteer in local hospitals) doesn’t need one to be a country’s president to discharge. Any one of the candidates can procure laptops, lab kits, or even buy those ICT Labs that are installed in a 40-foot shipping container; that come with solar panels and other kits. And proceed to distribute to schools across the country. Daniel Dube and Joyce Banda, with their connections, can easily get together and procure antibiotics and other medicines which they can then distribute to health centers across the country. While being outside government. Have they been doing that? Why not 🤔?

Yes, Patience Namadingo was once snubbed by the authorities at Mangochi District Hospital when he wanted to repair ambulances, but aside from that shameful incident nothing has stopped these candidates from undertaking any of such things in the name of public service, even if it is anywhere else across the country – other than Mangochi.

So, while we agree that ensuring that trained teachers are paid on time, and are paid well, and that such are government responsibilities, which would require public funds, many other things which can change people’s lives do not necessarily need one to be in government.

Healthcare preventive care, helping health centers provide nutritional supplements for small children in the rural areas, for example, and distributing vitamins are things which can be undertaken independent of the government. Mental health support can also be implemented independently of the government – if the will to do provide such a service is there, and people pool their resources together. Those well-wishers, who are now suddenly being talked about, why didn’t they lend a helping hand between 2020 and now?

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that Malawi’s government shouldn’t lead these efforts. No, what I’m saying is, given the painfully slow pace of progress we’ve seen in the last 10, maybe 15 years, many of the presidential candidates, election cycle after election cycle, have failed to show a track record of serious public service, when outside government. It’s a criticism Lazarus Chakwera also had to contend with before the 2019 elections. And look what happened since.

Finally, in terms of poverty reduction, I have been a big advocate of micro-credit initiatives for rural populations, but here too opportunities exist to help the rural masses. Establishing micro-credit institutions (which have sustainability initiatives built-in) that give cash transfers would help families invest in their futures, and would revitalize local communities. This too can be done outside government…in collaboration with various international partners.

Why the System Fails ordinary citizens

There are many reasons, but Malawi’s centralised governance, inherited from colonial rule, creates bottlenecks. Corruption thrives. Candidates are products of this very system. Some governments, like the current MCP government seems to prioritise control, rather than implementation. And hasn’t undertaken developmental projects across the country evenly. And the opposition is no different.

The way the system has worked this far needs an urgent and comprehensive overhaul. You have 17 adults, most with great potential, why should their capabilities only be of use, if they’re in high office as a president? Do you stop being effective and productive, when …you’re not a president?

A family member once replied to a question similar to this that ‘Some of them are doing it because they want to be able to go to the UN, to New York and to Geneva, with an entourage of 55 including some chiefs. They want to be able to go to China to beg, they’re not doing it for public service’

Bridging the Gap

Malawi’s upcoming election presents a critical juncture, where voters must decide between maintaining the status quo and embracing meaningful change.

It’s that important.

The country’s impoverished population requires tangible action, not empty promises. They need leaders who will engage with rural communities, understand their struggles, and work tirelessly alongside them to address their local concerns. This includes advocating for land rights for women, providing training and opportunities for youth, and implementing policies that prioritise the needs of ordinary citizens, and not just investors.

To achieve this, Malawi needs decentralization, anti-corruption reforms, and people-centered policies. The current political landscape has a disconnect between the ruling elite’s wishes and the general population’s needs, perpetuating economic and social divisions.

The 2025 election offers an opportunity for Malawi to break away from this pattern, which has repeated in previous election cycles, and usher in a new era of empowerment and equity. However, the outcome is uncertain, as many candidates are driven by personal ambition rather than a genuine desire to serve the people. Ultimately, the success of this election will depend on the ability of the majority of Malawians (beyond those who will vote for the “wrong candidate”) to vote for the “right candidate”.

But when over 70% of them live in poverty, and are often influenced by tribal leaders, and in the past have voted on regional lines, there’s no guarantee that their decision-making, will usher in a leader who can do the most to help the country as a whole.