Three senior lawyers engaged as public prosecutors in financial crimes-related cases have taken the State to court for terminating their contracts and subsequent discontinuation of cases they were prosecuting.
The three, namely Senior Counsel Kamudoni Nyasulu, George Desiderio Liwimbi and Enock Chibwana were under Team Linthumbu which was designed to provide visibility in the prosecution of high-profile cases in a timely manner to improve public confidence in the fight against corruption and fraud.
Those sued are Solicitor General and Secretary for Justice, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the Attorney General (AG) as first, second and third respondents in that order in Judicial Review Case Number 1 of 2026 in the High Court of Malawi Financial Crimes Division.
The trio entered into a consultancy agreement with the Malawi Government on February 1 2024 and were subsequently appointed as public prosecutors. They submit that the Solicitor General and Secretary for Justice issued them one-month notice of termination on December 10 2025.
Main arguments Besides querying the termination of their engagement, they argue that DPP Fostino Maere, then a private practice lawyer, was a defence lawyer against them in some cases and that seeking guidance from the AG to discontinue cases is against the law.
Nyasulu and the others have submitted before the court that prior to his appointment as DPP, Maere was a defence lawyer in several cases that include Criminal Case No. 19 of 2023 involving the Republic vs. Henry Mathanga, Dalitso Kabambe, Samuel Chilembwe Malitoni, and Cliff Kenneth Chiunda.
They further contend that he was also involved in Criminal Case No. 1 of 2025 – Republic vs. Henry Mathanga, Dalitso Kabambe, Leston Ted Mulli, Leonard Kandoje, Joseph Khupe, Felton Mulli, Mulli Brothers Limited and Webb Commercial Limited; Criminal Case No. 2 of 2025 – Republic vs. Dalitso Kabambe, Henry Mathanga, Samuel Chilembwe Malitoni, Elvis Thodi, Cliff Kenneth Chiunda and Joseph Mwanamvekha and Criminal Case No. 3 of 2025 – Republic vs. Dalitso Kabambe and Henry Mathanga.
In the cited cases, which they were prosecuting, they say Maere was defence counsel for former Reserve Bank of Malawi (RBM) Governor Dalitso Kabambe. They argue that in this regard, the DPP was for all practical purposes disqualified from making the decision to withdraw their appointments as public prosecutors.
They submit: “A like order of certiorari quashing the decision of the 3rd Defendant from misrepresenting to act as Director of Public Prosecutions in cases in which he is disqualified as a legal practitioner.
“A declaration that the decision of the 2nd Defendant in purporting to withdraw the appointment of the Claimants as Public Prosecutors was unlawful, unreasonable, in bad faith and ultra vires Section 43 of the Constitution of the Republic of Malawi.”
They also want the court to declare that Maere’s decision to act as DPP in cases in which he is disqualified as a legal practitioner is unlawful, unreasonable, biased and ultra vires the code of ethics under the Legal Education and Legal Practitioners Act.
Further, Nyasulu, in his skeleton arguments, submits that their team was about to expose K3.143 trillion in illegal budget transfers, unconstitutional CDF “appropriations”, manipulation of the Development Fund, misreporting to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and a 12-year pattern of fiscal illegality.
He says these findings implicated senior Treasury officials, political actors and individuals with direct access to the defendants.
They also argue that by seeking guidance from the AG and acting on his advice, the DPP violated Section 101(2)’s independence requirement and Section 99(3)’s exclusivity clause.
What they want In their submission before High Court Judge Anneline Kanthambi, the three lawyers first seek orders to quash the decision of the first defendant from terminating the consultancy agreement and of the DPP in withdrawing their appointments.
If permission to apply for Judicial review is granted, they seek an order that the impugned decisions of the defendants be stayed pending the determination of the hearing of the application for Judicial Review or further order.
Both Nyasulu and Judiciary spokesperson Ruth Mputeni confirmed that the court has since set May 8 2026 for hearing the application for permission to commence judicial review in the case.
Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs spokesperson Frank Namangale said they were yet to be served.
Last week, Parliament’s Legal Affairs Committee stated that it was planning to engage the DPP to explain his office’s decisions.
