The Gender Equality Act requires either sex to hold 40 to 60 percent of public positions, but Minister of Finance, Economic Planning and Decentralisation Joseph Mwanamvekha recently appointed an all-male Revenue Appeals Tribunal to settle tax disputes. Similarly, his Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation counterpart George Chaponda has named only one woman among 20 heads of mission and diplomats. How long will appointing authorities get away with impunity? Our Staff Writer JAMES CHAVULA engages Malawi Human Rights Commission (MHRC) executive secretary Habiba Osman on the application of gender laws. Excerpts:
Q: What is MHRC‘s view on the all-men Revenue Appeals Tribunal as women increasingly break barriers?
A: The commision remains concerned whenever public appointments do not reflect the spirit and legal requirements of the Gender Equality Act, which mandates equitable representation of women and men in decision-making bodies. While Malawi has made measurable progress, the gap remains significant. For example, women currently occupy only 21.4 percent of parliamentary seats and hold less than 25 percent of Cabinet positions in most recent administration.
Q:What do these figures say about the push for gender equality and rule of law?
A:These figures show that while progress exists, parity is far from being achieved. At the same time, Malawian women are increasingly driving economic growth. For instance, women account for over 70 percent of the agricultural labour force and a growing proportion of small and medium enterprises are owned or led by women. Given these realities, it becomes even more difficult to justify scenarios where women are absent or significantly underrepresented in key public decision-making bodies such as the tax justice tribunals. Representation is not simply about numbers; it is about fairness, inclusion, legitimacy and compliance with the law. Public institutions must reflect the society they serve. The commission therefore strongly encourages appointing authorities to align appointments with the 40–60 percent gender threshold required by the Gender Equality Act.
Q: How do you feel that the disregard of gender ratios is spilling from the Executive to parliamentary committees and court-related processes, which symbolise the rule of law?
A:The commission views this trend with serious concern, particularly where institutions entrusted with upholding the rule of law fall short of complying with it themselves. Judicial and quasi-judicial bodies are expected to embody constitutional values, including equality and non-discrimination. When these institutions fall below legal gender thresholds, it risks undermining public confidence. Women remain underrepresented in senior judicial and tribunal roles across Africa, often below 35 percent. While Malawi has made progress in appointing female judges, leadership positions in quasi-judicial bodies remain male-dominated. Importantly, this is not a question of capacity. Malawian women are increasingly represented in the legal profession. They are excelling in academia, business, governance and public service. The numbers of women are expanding in tax-paying and entrepreneurial roles, strengthening the national economy.The issue is therefore whether institutions are taking deliberate, affirmative action to comply with the law. Compliance must not be selective. Institutions responsible for interpreting laws must also demonstrate adherence to them in practice.
Q: How far is MHRC, which oversees the implementation of the Gender Equality Act, prepared to go in ensuring the law is fully applied and hold violators to account?
A: The commission takes enforcement of the Gender Equality Act very seriously because it is a binding legal framework, not a guideline. Section 11 of the GEA clearly requires that public institutions maintain a gender composition of not less than 40 percent and not more than 60 percent of either sex. Where this is not met, it indicates non-compliance. The commission has both preventive and enforcement powers. Among others, it engages with appointing authorities formally, conducts monitoring and gender audits, making public statements to promote transparency and pursues further accountability mechanisms where necessary.
Presently, evidence shows why enforcement matters: (1). Countries that enforce quotas, such as Rwanda, have achieved over 60 percent female parliamentary representation, the highest globally. (2). Countries without enforcement mechanisms continue to stagnate below 30 percent.
In Malawi, persistent gaps suggest that voluntary compliance alone is insufficient. This is why the commission supports strengthening enforcement provisions through the ongoing review of the Gender Equality Act led by the Ministry of Justice. If institutions persistently disregard the law, the commission is prepared to escalate within its legal mandate to ensure accountability, because equality before the law must be real, not theoretical.
Q: It is 13 years since Parliament enacted the law. What has the commission done to ensure that the gender ratios are not left to appointing authorities’ discretion?
A:Over the years, the commission has taken consistent and practical steps to promote compliance. These include conducting gender audits across public institutions; engaging Parliament, ministries and State agencies on non-compliance; issuing public advisories and statements; and raising awareness that gender representation is a legal obligation, not a discretionary matter. Despite these efforts, progress has been uneven. Many institutions still fall below the 40 percent minimum threshold for women. Representation in high-level decision-making spaces remains inconsistent and often below legal requirements. This highlights a gap between the law and implementation. To address this, MHRC is actively contributing to the review of the Gender Equality Act. The review is aimed at strengthening enforcement provisions, closing implementation gaps and introducing clearer accountability mechanisms. The commission’s position remains firm: The law must be applied consistently across all institutions, without exception. Gender equality in public appointments is not optional; it is a statutory requirement and a cornerstone of democratic governance.
Q:What is MHRC’s reaction to a shortlist of diplomats, which comprises one woman against 19 men as heads of mission?
A:The commission has become aware of the reports that diplomatic appointments being scrutinised by Parliament comprise one woman and 19 men. The commission has written the committee of Parliament to find out the status of this, clearly, outlining its concerns around the 60:40 ratio stipulated by Section 11 of the Gender Equality Act. If this list is true, the commission is concerned. The commission decided to write the appointing authority through the Public Appointments Commitee to not only be mindful of their vetting process, but also take into consideration the requirements of Section 11 of the Gender Equality Act as they are vetting these appointments. That section really applies for all sectors. As much as the decision could have been made by the Executive, the Legislature also has the responsibility to ensure public appointments comply with the Gender Equality Act.
