MDF under scrutiny for internal security roles
Malawi Defence Force (MDF) has come under scrutiny over its role in internal security matters with Malawi Law Society (MLS) cautioning that the routine involvement could potentially undermine the Malawi Police Service.
The observation comes on the back of a joint statement signed by MDF Commander General Paul Velentino Phiri and Police Inspector General Merlyne Yolamu two weeks ago warning against political violence in the run-up to the September 16 2025 General Election.

In an earlier interview, Phiri justified MDF’s role in internal security matters, saying it is backed by the Constitution, but both MLS and a former senior MDF officer this week said the military ought to intervene sparingly and in special cases.
Phiri cited Section 160 1(b) of the Constitution as mandating MDF to play a role in internal security.
The section in question mandates the MDF to “uphold and protect the constitutional order in the Republic and assist the civil authorities in the proper exercise of their functions under this Constitution”.
But in a written response yesterday, MLS honorary secretary Gabriel Chembezi said MDF’s routine assistance to agencies, whose primary duty is internal security, raises questions on the capacity of those institutions.
He said the cited Section 160 (1) of the Constitution, read in the context of other relevant provisions such as Section 153 of the Constitution, means that the MDF’s primary focus is to defend the territorial integrity of the country while leaving internal security matters to Homeland Security officials such as the police.
Said Chembezi: “When the internal security agents and civilian authorities need assistance to better execute their respective constitutional mandate, ordinarily it should not be routine assistance because then it raises the question whether those being assisted are properly equipped to carry out their primary job under the Constitution.”
On the legal justification of the joint statement by MDF and Police chiefs, he said while it may be within the spirit of the constitutional provision, it “reflects on the capacity and ability of the Homeland Security agents to meet the demands of their mandate without the help of the defence force”.
This is not the first time MDF has been involved in internal security affairs as at the height of the post-2019 Presidential Election protests it provided security to demonstrators and judges who presided over the elections case.
In 2022, Nation Publications Limited published an investigative story which highlighted that in 2020 alone, government gave the MDF a go-ahead to procure anti-riot equipment worth $28 650 500 and water cannons valued at $10 524 000 for purposes of internal security following a spate of demonstrations.
Then MDF Commander General Vincent Nundwe (retired) in a November 2022 interview questioned the procurement of the equipment which was made before he was reappointed to the position, saying it was outside MDF’s core mandate.
He said: “That can be answered by those who made this decision. Maybe politicians were behind it. I was not in office by the time this decision was made.
“When I came back [into office], I queried why government bought us the water cannons to defend a country? Those are the things I queried,” he said.
Previously, the MDF has also been involved in joint operations with the police, including what was known as operation chotsa mbava and removal of street vendors under former president Bingu wa Mutharika’s regime.
At the time, the military came under the spotlight for their active involvement in internal affairs after effecting an arrest on former president Bakili Muluzi in 2008 at the airport on arrival from a foreign trip for treason related charges.
Meanwhile, a former senior MDF officer, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the Constitution and other laws lack clarity on this which gives room for abuse of the military in internal matters.
He said his understanding is that the MDF should only intervene where police are clearly constrained or where a situation truly threatens national defence, adding he does not believe the joint statement falls within this purview of the law.
Said the former senior officer: “The MDF may be expected to intervene in situations where there is a significant threat to national security, public safety, or civil order that exceeds the capacity of the police to manage effectively. For example, include widespread violence, civil unrest or natural disasters.”
MDF sources also confided that any intervention by the military can be a directive from the Commander in Chief, who is the President, or may follow a request from police or other civilian authorities such as the Minister of Defence as well as MDF’s own independent assessment if they believe there is an imminent threat to national security or public safety.
Writing in a book Beyond Impunity: New Directions for Governance in Malawi law professor Dan Kuwali, a senior officer in MDF, also stressed that Section 160 (1(b) of the Constitution mandates the MDF to assist civilian authorities, including the police, in the proper exercise of their functions “where they are overstretched or overwhelmed”.
“To reduce the involvement of the MDF in internal security operations, there is need to resuscitate and build the capacity of the MPS for it to be able to deal with internal security problems,” reads Kuwali’s chapter in this write-up which features several other esteemed scholars.