President Peter Mutharika’s swift decision to reverse his predecessor’s administrative reforms by relocating key government agencies is facing immediate and harsh criticism from civil society organisations (CSOs), who deem the order ill-timed and retrogressive to public service efficiency.
On October 10, the President ordered the headquarters of the Malawi Communications Regulatory Authority (Macra), the Malawi Electoral Commission (MEC), and the Malawi Housing Corporation (MHC) to return to Blantyre, while the Malawi Prisons Service headquarters must revert to Zomba.
Mutharika justified the move as a strategic effort to “realign and reallocate certain government institutions to promote administrative balance and efficiency.”
However, this justification has ignited fierce debate over the government’s commitment to administrative reforms and equitable access to services.
CSO leaders argue the move directly undermines years of carefully planned institutional reforms.
Centre for Human Rights Education and Advice (Chrea), executive director Victor Mhango warned that the relocation may weaken the essential reforms that institutions like the Malawi Prison Service were undertaking.
“When [Malawi] Prison Services offices were relocated to Lilongwe, they worked closely with ministries, courts and oversight bodies,” Mhango explained.
“This decision not only works against that coordinated drive but will also have a significant psychological impact on staff members who have already settled in Lilongwe.”
National Advocacy Platform chairperson Benedicto Kondowe also echoed this sentiment.
He noted that the Malawi Prison Service had been earmarked for comprehensive reforms to become the corrective service and the current order “risks diluting focus and diverting resources.”
“Reforms require stable administrative structures, coordinated investment, and policy continuity,” Kondowe stressed. “The move will disrupt institutional momentum, delay implementation, and affect service delivery.”
Kondowe also pointed out the specific operational challenges for agencies like Macra, which require frequent engagement with multiple stakeholders in the capital. This disruption is particularly concerning given that the government is already constructing the Judiciary headquarters in Lilongwe to improve inter-institutional coordination with the Executive, Legislature, and diplomatic missions.
The most forceful criticism centres on the lack of fiscal transparency and the negative impact on national accessibility.
Moses Mkandawire, executive director of the Nyika Institute, argued that decisions of this magnitude should be guided by “clear policy frameworks rooted in efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and national accessibility and not political convenience or regional symbolism.”
He highlighted the inconvenience that might arise for citizens travelling from the Northern Region.
Citing the MEC offices as an example, Mkandawire stated that the move reverses convenience for people travelling from Chitipa, turning what was a manageable trip to Lilongwe into a two-day, high-cost journey to Blantyre.
Centre for Social Accountability & Transparency (CSAT) executive director Willy Kambwandira questioned the government’s commitment to accountability given the country’s tight fiscal situation.
“The timing of this decision sends mixed signals as regards government priorities. The decision lacks transparency in terms of a clear cost-benefit analysis,” he said.
Kambwandira cautioned that the relocation will inevitably lead to unnecessary spending on logistics, allowances, and renovations, raising serious accountability questions amid a fragile economy.
He added that government has failed to justify how this expensive and disruptive decision will ultimately lead to better services for the Malawian public.
The institutions in question had only recently completed their moves to the capital: MEC relocated in June 2023, Malawi Prisons in January 2024, followed by Macra and MHC in March 2024.
