Barely a week after being sworn in as Malawi’s seventh President, Peter Mutharika has drawn sharp criticism for threatening unspecified action against civil society leaders allegedly planning anti-government demonstrations.
Speaking in Mangochi where he spent much of his time following his 2020 electoral defeat, the President claimed to have intelligence that unnamed civil society organisations (CSOs) were meeting secretly to plot protests aimed at destabilising his new administration.
“I know who is funding these organisations,” Mutharika said. “They are meeting at night and planning something bad. I will bite you. This time, I was voted for by many people. If anyone tries to disturb my rule, I will come against him.”
Visibly agitated, the President warned that he would not tolerate a repeat of the 2019–2020 protest wave that preceded his ouster, insisting that he was elected to govern not to be intimidated.
But Human Rights Defenders Coalition (HRDC) vice- chairperson Michael Kaiyatsa dismissed the President’s remarks as unfounded and inflammatory.
“We have no plans to demonstrate. I am not aware of any CSO intending to protest. This is a new administration and we’re looking forward to engaging it constructively,” he said.
Youth and Society executive director Charles Kajoloweka said Mutharika’s rhetoric undermines constitutional values and urged him to prioritise dialogue over intimidation.
“Our expectation is that the Malawi leader needs to reach out to civil society organisations. Priority should not be intimidation. His priority should be in solving challenges that Malawians are facing at the moment. He should reach out to the civil society organisations,” said Kajoloweka.
He said the President should be protecting the Constitution.
National Advocacy Platform chairperson Benedicto Kondowe, a legal expert, warned that Mutharika’s threats risk violating both domestic and international human rights obligations.
“Section 38 of the Constitution guarantees the right to peaceful assembly the right to assemble and demonstrate with others peacefully and unarmed, while Section 12
anchors the exercise of State authority in respect for human rights and the rule of law.
“Such rhetoric also has chilling effects on civic space, contradicting Malawi’s commitments under both domestic and international law to protect human rights defenders and enable democratic participation. Civil society demonstrations are a legitimate form of accountability, often filling gaps where other oversight mechanisms are weak. Instead of threats, the State has a positive obligation to facilitate and protect assemblies even where they are critical of government,” he said.
Malawi Congress Party (MCP), now in opposition, denied any involvement in the alleged protest plans.
Party spokesperson Jessie Kabwira said the DPP should focus on delivering its campaign promises rather than deflecting blame.
“Malawians expect results; not excuses,” Kabwira said. “The DPP promised free secondary education and lower fertiliser prices. When Malawians hold them accountable they should not blame others. They have mandate now and Malawians expect them to deliver than pushing the blame to others”
Political analyst George Phiri offered a more sympathetic view of Mutharika’s concerns, suggesting that it may be premature for CSOs to organise demonstrations.
“This government has only been in office for a week,” Phiri said. “It’s unlikely that CSOs would mobilise so quickly unless they’re politically motivated. Civic space has been quiet for years even amid economic hardship.”
Between 2019 and 2020, HRDC led mass protests demanding the resignation of Malawi Electoral Commission chairperson Jane Ansah over alleged electoral irregularities. Mutharika, then president, accused CSOs of colluding with opposition leaders to topple his government, a claim he continues to stand by.
