The Human Rights Consultative Committee (HRCC) has asked the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to drop fresh corruption charges against convicted Chinese wildlife trafficker Lin Yunhua and release him, arguing that he has already served his sentence and is being selectively prosecuted.
In a letter and legal memorandum dated July 15 2026, HRCC chairperson Robert Mkwezalamba urged DPP Fostino Maele to use his constitutional powers under Section 99 to discontinue the pending proceedings through a nolle prosequi.
pardons. | Nation
Lin was arrested in August 2019 following a multi-agency operation targeting the Lin-Zhang syndicate, an international network involved in the poaching and trafficking of ivory, rhino horns and pangolin scales, as well as money laundering.
In September 2021, the Lilongwe Senior Resident Magistrate Court sentenced him to 14 years for wildlife trafficking, illegal possession of specimens and money laundering. The sentence was backdated to his arrest.
HRCC says Lin has since completed the custodial term after benefiting from presidential remission programmes in December 2021, July 2023 and March 2024.
He nevertheless remains in custody over corruption charges filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in 2025.
The charges followed a Nation investigation published on October 28 2024, which reported allegations that Lin bribed the then officer-in-charge of Maula Prison with K30 million and built him a house in Lilongwe’s Area 49 in exchange for preferential treatment, better accommodation and unauthorised prison escapes between 2019 and 2021.
‘Selective prosecution’
HRCC argues that while Lin has been prosecuted for allegedly offering the bribe, prison officials accused of soliciting and receiving it have not faced criminal charges.
“The allegations published implicate both the alleged giver and the alleged recipients of the purported bribes,” Mkwezalamba says in the memorandum.
“However, while Mr Lin Yunhua has been prosecuted, the prison officers alleged to have received the bribes have reportedly not been subjected to criminal prosecution, but dealt with administratively.”
The rights body argues that Sections 24(1) and 36 of the Corrupt Practices Act impose criminal liability on public officers who solicit bribes or fail to report corrupt offers.
It contends that prosecuting Lin while dealing with the implicated public officers administratively amounts to unequal application of the law.
HRCC also points to an earlier application by the ACB to discontinue the bribery proceedings after the bureau determined it could not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
The court rejected the application, stating that the constitutional authority to discontinue criminal proceedings rests with the DPP under Section 99(2)(c) and (e) of the Constitution.
Opposition from conservation groups
HRCC’s intervention follows strong opposition from environmental organisations to any attempt to withdraw the corruption case.
A coalition of 12 civil society organisations—including Indigenous Conservation of Nature (Icon), Centre for Environmental Policy and Advocacy (Cepa), Youth and Society and Lilongwe Wildlife Trust—previously protested reports that the State intended to abandon the charges.
Icon founder Fumukazi Zilanie Gondwe said the coalition was concerned that withdrawing the case would undermine Malawi’s fight against corruption and wildlife crime.
The coalition also called on Maele to recuse himself from decisions involving Lin, citing his previous role as legal counsel for the convicted syndicate leader before joining government.
Following a High Court decision in July rejecting the ACB’s application to discontinue the case, Gondwe said the ruling strengthened public confidence in the justice system.
She said the court had found the application an abuse of process and an unnecessary waste of judicial time and public resources.
‘Irreparable prejudice’
Mkwezalamba warned that continued detention after completion of Lin’s wildlife sentence could expose the State to legal claims and compensation costs.
“Every additional day Mr Lin Yunhua remains in custody carries the potential for significant and irreparable prejudice,” he said.
He argued that if the corruption prosecution ultimately collapses, taxpayers could face compensation claims arising from unlawful detention.
HRCC said its intervention was intended to uphold constitutionalism, due process and equal protection of the law, rather than weaken Malawi’s fight against corruption and organised crime.
Ministry of Justice spokesperson Frank Namangale acknowledged receipt of the petition to discontinue the case, but said it would be considered in the light of the relevant law and facts.
“The person in question is in lawful custody sanctioned by the High Court, so there is no risk of any lawsuit against the State,” he said.
