The Political Parties Act criminalises political handouts, but the law hardly cracks the whip on the usual culprits at the receiving end of what is supposed to be a give-and-take offence such as corruption. What does this say about Malawi’s democracy? Our Staff Writer JAMES CHAVULA engages National Initiative for Civic Education executive director Grey Kalindekafe. Excerpts:
Q: What do you make of the politics of handouts that some Malawians not only approve but also demand and queue for?
A: Political handouts have become one of the most corrosive habits in public life. They are illegal, morally troubling and deeply unfair, yet they continue to attract crowds and even a sense of entitlement. Poverty makes handouts look like opportunity, turning political corruption into a practical exchange. For many citizens, campaign season becomes a temporary economy of hope, where survival outweighs long-term development.
Q: What does this tendency of queuing for goods that are legally unacceptable say about us as Malawians?
A: The culture of handouts reflects weak trust in institutions and the belief that elections are marketplaces of favours rather than contests of ideas. It signals that poverty and exclusion have forced citizens to negotiate dignity through proximity to politicians. This is not simply moral failure; it is the collapse of trust, accountability, and service delivery.
Q: Now that the law only outlaws politicians from giving unjustifiable gifts, how do we fix the receiving side of this culture of handouts while regulating things politicians do?
A: Demand sustains supply. When voters cheer or defend handouts, they reinforce the same political economy that weakens democracy. Citizens need alternatives such as social protection, reliable services and visible State presence. Otherwise, handouts remain psychologically powerful.
Q: Are State systems, including the Registrar of Political Parties established by the 2018 law, not barking at the wrong tree by leaving recipients beyond its reach?
A: Yes and no. Yes, because politicians are indeed the most visible actors in the handout culture, but focusing only on them misses the deeper roots of the problem. Handouts persist because voters, brokers, party agents and even community leaders participate in the same logic that the law seeks to eliminate. Poverty makes citizens vulnerable, weak enforcement allows malpractice to go unpunished and entrenched patronage networks normalise handouts as part of political life. If enforcement remains selective or symbolic, the cycle will continue regardless of how loudly we condemn politicians.
No, not entirely, because politicians cannot be absolved of responsibility simply because other actors are involved. They are the ones who initiate and finance handouts, and they benefit directly from the manipulation of voters. The law must hold them accountable, and citizens must see that vote buying carries real consequences. Without consistent enforcement against politicians, the culture of handouts will remain entrenched.
Therefore, the problem is two-sided. On one hand, politicians exploit poverty and weak institutions to sustain patronage. On the other hand, citizens, brokers and local leaders reinforce the practice by treating handouts as survival or entitlement. Breaking this cycle requires both strong enforcement against politicians and systemic reforms that reduce desperation among citizens. Only then can democracy shift from transactional politics to genuine representation.
Q: How do handouts that ordinary citizens expect as a matter of entitlement harm democracy?
A: Handouts harm democracy in subtle but deeply damaging ways. They distort free choice because a voter who accepts money or food in a moment of need may no longer be voting on conscience or policy, but on immediate survival. They reward short-term spectacle over long-term planning, teaching politicians that distributing cash or gifts is cheaper and more effective than investing in roads, schools, or health systems. They also deepen inequality, since only those close to campaign activity or patronage networks benefit, leaving others excluded. Over time, this practice hollows democracy, turning elections into rituals of bribery rather than genuine systems of representation and accountability.
Q: Does the Political Parties Act adequately address give-and-take politics that hurt democracy so profoundly?
A: The Political Parties Act was designed to regulate party financing and curb corruption, but several weaknesses have allowed handout culture to thrive. Among others, enforcement mechanisms remain weak, with parties rarely facing consequences for distributing handouts because monitoring is inconsistent and penalties are minimal. Loopholes in donation declarations further undermine transparency as the Act requires disclosure of donations above certain thresholds but enforcement is lax, allowing hidden financing that fuels vote buying. In-kind contributions such as food, transport and small gifts often escape scrutiny altogether, creating space for disguised bribery. Oversight capacity is also poor, with institutions tasked to monitor party financing lacking the resources to ensure compliance. These gaps have normalised handouts as part of campaign strategy, embedding patronage into the electoral system and weakening the foundations of democratic accountability.
Q: How do we make the culture of handouts history regardless of who is initiating or demanding the goods?
A: Fixing the culture of handouts requires a combination of enforcement, education and social protection. Citizens must be empowered through stronger civic education so they understand that accepting handouts weakens their bargaining power and entrenches corruption. At the same time, the law must be enforced consistently, ensuring that both the givers and the networks that facilitate vote buying face real consequences. Reducing desperation is equally important, which means expanding social protection so that basic needs are met through reliable state systems. Improved service delivery such as dependable access to clinics, schools and jobs will further reduce dependence on campaign gifts. Alongside this, issue-based politics should be promoted, with parties, media, civil society and faith leaders pushing debates on policy rather than gifts. Finally, protecting whistle-blowers and observers is essential, since local reporting can make illegal handouts riskier and less routine. Together, these measures can shift the culture from transactional politics toward one rooted in dignity, accountability, and genuine representation.
As a nation, we need a different civic ethic. The fight against handouts is a fight for citizenship. Democracy cannot thrive when voters see themselves as beggars and politicians as benefactors. Public office must be restored as a service, not a source of favours. A handout feeds the stomach for a day; a clean vote can shape the nation for years.
