Political infiltration, shrinking donor support and the rise of “mercenary” civil society organisations are eroding Malawi’s civic space, weakening one of democracy’s most important checks on power.
Civil society organisations (CSOs) have long been regarded as the watchdogs of Malawi’s democracy, amplifying the voices of ordinary citizens and holding those in power to account. But that role is increasingly under threat.
Caught between intensifying political interference and dwindling donor funding, many organisations now operate in an increasingly hostile environment. The result is a civic space that is steadily shrinking, leaving the biggest losers as ordinary Malawians who depend on independent watchdogs to defend their rights and demand accountability from those they elect.
The pressure is not always overt. Sometimes it comes through intimidation or smear campaigns. At other times it comes disguised as financial support, political patronage or offers of influential positions. Collectively, these tactics have blurred the line between independent civic activism and partisan politics, fuelling public scepticism about whose interests some organisations truly serve.
The politics of infiltration
Multiple CSO leaders interviewed for this investigation say politicians routinely attempt to influence civic organisations by offering financial incentives or other benefits in exchange for advancing partisan interests.
Human Rights Consultative Committee chairperson Robert Mkwezalamba says he has repeatedly been approached but has resisted such overtures.
Rejecting them, however, often comes at a cost.
According to Mkwezalamba, organisations that refuse political influence are frequently branded “enemies of the State”, while politicians simultaneously bankroll parallel organisations designed to imitate genuine watchdogs and dilute critical voices.
He argues that the strategy has steadily eroded public confidence in civil society by replacing principled advocacy with selective outrage.
“We have resisted deliberate attempts to influence us. CSOs are supposed to remain neutral, objective and focused on issues affecting poor and voiceless Malawians. Political infiltration has undermined objectivity and encouraged selective justice on matters of national interest.”
Mkwezalamba says politically compromised organisations increasingly defend their benefactors instead of promoting justice, fairness and accountability.
“The result is that ordinary Malawians no longer know which organisations genuinely represent the public interest and which are serving political masters,” he says.
Confidential engagements
Human Rights Defenders Coalition (HRDC) chairperson Michael Kaiyatsa acknowledges that politicians frequently seek private engagements with civic leaders.
Although declining to discuss specific cases, he says maintaining institutional independence has become one of the sector’s greatest challenges.
“While I am not in a position to discuss specific confidential engagements, maintaining institutional independence has always been a guiding principle in how I approach such situations.”
For Kaiyatsa, preserving public trust depends on ensuring that civic organisations remain accountable to citizens rather than political actors.
The political playbook
Interviews with two former politicians and an aide to a senior politician active since 2009 suggest that attempts to influence civil society are neither isolated nor accidental.
Instead, they describe a deliberate political playbook aimed at infiltrating existing organisations or creating new ones that appear independent while quietly advancing partisan agendas.
The aide, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, says politicians cultivate relationships with influential CSO leaders, sponsor allies into leadership positions, provide financial backing or establish organisations that project an image of independence while promoting political interests.
“Politicians typically seek influence within CSOs by cultivating relationships with leaders, supporting allied individuals into influential positions, providing funding or creating organisations that appear independent but advance political interests,” he says.
According to the aide, the strategy works because many civic organisations enjoy greater public trust than political parties themselves.
“When a respected CSO speaks, citizens often listen more readily than when the same message comes directly from politicians.”
Yet he concedes that the benefits are usually short-lived.
“While such influence may provide short-term political advantages, it can ultimately undermine both the credibility of politicians and the independence of civil society organisations once the relationship becomes apparent.”
The two former politicians interviewed separately echo that assessment, saying political interference inevitably weakens the neutrality and public standing of civic organisations.
A familiar pattern
Veteran human rights defender Undule Mwakasungula says attempts to capture civic organisations have occurred under every administration since Malawi embraced multiparty democracy.
“Politicians have always tried to persuade CSOs to soften their positions. This has happened with every government. In most cases, the approaches come from individual politicians rather than official government structures.”
He says political funding has also fuelled the emergence of what many within the sector describe as “mercenary” organisations—groups established primarily to defend political interests rather than promote public accountability.
According to Mwakasungula, these organisations have sown confusion within civil society, fractured solidarity and steadily eroded public confidence.
“This has weakened trust in civil society as a whole and shifted attention away from real issues towards personal political interests. Genuine advocacy has become more difficult and civic space increasingly polarised.”
The consequences extend beyond public perception.
Mwakasungula says politicians have employed a wider range of tactics to constrain civic activism, including intimidation, bureaucratic delays in registering organisations, restrictions on funding and public campaigns portraying independent CSOs as foreign agents or political proxies.
“Governments have also used divide-and-rule tactics, weakening civil society’s collective influence over governance processes.”
Chaos as a political strategy
Former HRDC chairperson Gift Trapence believes political interference has evolved beyond infiltrating civil society organisations.
Increasingly, he says, politically aligned religious leaders and “mercenary” CSOs emerge whenever a major national controversy erupts, presenting themselves as independent voices while defending those in power or attacking legitimate critics.
According to Trapence, many of these organisations have turned political advocacy into a business model.
“They wait for national scandals to erupt because that is when they are hired to defend government or discredit genuine critics,” he says.
Some even organise what he describes as “paid-for” press briefings, where public statements are issued less in pursuit of accountability than in service of political patrons.
“Politicians are happy with the confusion they have created because it diverts attention from issues of accountability.”
Trapence argues that the consequences extend far beyond individual organisations.
As suspicion deepens, genuine watchdogs increasingly question one another’s motives, making collaboration more difficult and weakening civil society’s collective influence.
“This has made the work of CSOs difficult because there is little coordination and organisations increasingly suspect one another of serving different political masters.”
Ultimately, he says, citizens are left without consistent and credible scrutiny of those in power.
Instead of robust checks and balances between elections, Malawians are often forced to wait until the next vote to punish governments for poor governance.
An old problem in a new form
Political mistrust between governments and civil society is not new.
Academic research suggests it has shaped State-CSO relations since Malawi’s transition to multiparty democracy in the early 1990s.
In his 2011 paper, Civil Society Organisations and the Changing Nature of African Politics: The Case of the CSO-Government Relationship in Malawi, Professor Jonathan Makuwira argues that successive governments have viewed CSOs with suspicion, largely because many depend on international donors for funding.
The study, published in the Journal of Asian and African Studies, notes that although multiparty democracy created unprecedented space for civic participation, that openness has remained accompanied by persistent political mistrust.
Government suspicion of externally funded organisations, Makuwira argues, has repeatedly strained relations between the State and independent watchdogs.
More than a decade later, recent evidence suggests many of those concerns remain.
Protected by law, constrained in practice
The gap between constitutional protections and everyday reality is highlighted in the latest Civic Freedom Monitor country note for Malawi, prepared by National Advocacy Platform chairperson Benedicto Kondowe and published by the International Centre for Not-for-Profit Law in April 2026.
The report acknowledges that Malawi’s legal framework generally protects freedom of association, assembly and expression.
In practice, however, civic organisations face a very different operating environment.
While CSOs continue to participate in policy discussions, constitutional reform and governance debates, the report says their independence is increasingly constrained by restrictive regulation, intrusive government oversight and growing financial pressures.
It also cites arbitrary arrests, the stigmatisation of government critics and excessive use of force during demonstrations as factors that continue to undermine civic freedoms.
Taken together, the findings paint a picture of a civic space that remains legally open but is becoming progressively narrower in practice.
Funding crisis fuels political capture
Beyond political pressure, analysts say another threat is quietly reshaping Malawi’s civic landscape—money.
As donor priorities shift and development funding declines, many organisations are finding it increasingly difficult to sustain operations.
Associate Professor Boniface Dulani, of the University of Malawi’s Department of Political Science and Government, argues that this financial vulnerability has made some organisations more susceptible to partisan capture.
“We have seen the emergence of what I would call government CSOs that openly adopt partisan political positions,” he says.
“In today’s difficult funding environment, these organisations often find themselves on a more stable financial footing.”
Dulani warns that while such organisations may survive financially, they do so at the expense of the wider sector’s credibility.
“Their existence undermines public confidence in civil society as a whole.”
Yet he acknowledges the complexity of the problem.
CSO leaders, he notes, are citizens with constitutional rights, including the freedom to hold political views or belong to political parties.
Requiring them to be apolitical would amount to restricting those rights.
Instead, Dulani believes the solution lies in creating more sustainable and independent funding models.
He points to Scandinavian countries, where governments are legally required to provide financial support to civil society without compromising organisational autonomy.
“A similar model could help secure stable funding while insulating CSOs from partisan political influence,” he says.
The challenge of preserving independence
For Professor Nicholas Cheeseman, Professor of Democracy at the University of Birmingham, Malawi’s experience reflects a broader democratic challenge confronting many African countries.
Having conducted extensive research in Malawi, Cheeseman argues that two interconnected trends pose the greatest threat to independent civic action.
“The infiltration of CSOs by political actors and the co-optation of prominent civic leaders into partisan politics are two sides of the same coin,” he says.
“Both weaken civil society’s independence and its ability to hold power to account.”
He notes that Malawi is far from unique. Countries such as Zambia have experienced similar cycles in which prominent civic leaders transition into partisan politics, gradually eroding public confidence in the independence of civil society.
According to Cheeseman, healthy democracies depend on civic organisations that can challenge governments and opposition parties alike.
Their authority rests not on political allegiance but on consistent adherence to constitutional principles, accountability and the public interest.
“When prominent civic leaders accept government appointments, civil society risks being viewed as an extension of the new administration rather than an independent democratic institution.”
Ideally, Cheeseman says, civic leaders should remain outside government, preserving their credibility across successive political administrations.
In reality, however, shrinking donor support and financial pressures make that increasingly difficult.
This investigative article was produced with funding from the Hivos Connect! Defend! Act! Programme
Look out for Part 2 in Nation on Sunday tomorrow
