As Malawi inches closer to the 2025 general elections, a disconcerting political reality is taking shape—former presidents Peter Mutharika and Joyce Banda are positioning themselves to reclaim power. This development should not be taken lightly, as it signals the potential for a dangerous recycling of leadership that failed to meet the country’s needs in the past.
The global resurgence of ex-presidents seeking to return to office is not without precedent. Leaders like Donald Trump in the United States and John Dramani Mahama in Ghana have reignited their political ambitions, often riding on a wave of nostalgia and public dissatisfaction with incumbent governments.
However, the contexts in Malawi demand a deeper reflection. The question is not merely about giving ex-leaders a second chance; it is about whether these individuals can provide the transformational leadership Malawi so desperately needs.
Peter Mutharika’s presidency from 2014 to 2020 was marred by allegations of corruption, governance failures, and an apparent inability to tackle pressing national challenges. Under his leadership, Malawi experienced significant scandals, including questionable procurement deals, allegations of state capture, and the plundering of public resources. While Mutharika has often distanced himself from these controversies, critics argue that his administration fostered a culture of impunity and lack of accountability. For many Malawians, his tenure symbolizes a period of stagnation rather than progress.
Joyce Banda, despite her initial praise for stabilizing a nation in crisis, left office with her legacy overshadowed by the infamous “Cashgate” scandal, where billions of kwacha were siphoned from public coffers under her watch. Banda’s international acclaim as a reformist leader did little to repair the deep distrust at home, as her government struggled to restore financial discipline and ensure justice for those implicated in the scandal.
The potential return of these two leaders highlights a deeper issue in Malawi’s political culture—an over-reliance on familiar faces, even when their records suggest caution. While proponents argue that experience matters, it is crucial to evaluate what kind of experience these leaders bring. Mutharika’s presidency saw a deteriorating economy, skyrocketing unemployment, and persistent corruption, while Banda’s tenure ended with unresolved governance failures and weak institutional reforms.
Allowing these former leaders to return risks perpetuating the same challenges that have historically plagued Malawi. It could anchor the country to a past defined by economic mismanagement, inadequate governance, and the prioritization of political survival over national progress.
Moreover, the political baggage these leaders carry could exacerbate divisions within an already polarized electorate. Instead of uniting the nation, their return could reignite old animosities, as they may focus more on repairing their legacies or settling political scores than addressing the real issues facing Malawians.
This recycling of leadership also stifles the emergence of new voices and fresh ideas. Malawi’s Vision 2063 calls for transformative and forward-thinking leadership to drive economic growth, improve governance, and build a self-reliant nation. Recycling former leaders with questionable track records is a direct contradiction to this aspiration.
Malawians must critically evaluate whether these leaders can genuinely offer solutions to the pressing challenges of food insecurity, economic instability, and rampant unemployment. Nostalgia for past administrations should not blind voters to the potential for transformative leadership from a new generation of leaders who are unburdened by past failures and scandals.
The return of Mutharika and Banda should not be seen as a solution but rather as a symptom of a broken political system where failure is rewarded, and innovation is stifled. Malawi stands at a crossroads. The choice is between clinging to the comfort of the known, despite its failures, or embracing the possibility of new leadership that prioritizes accountability, transparency, and progress.
In 2025, Malawians must decide whether to look forward to a brighter future or remain tethered to a past that has consistently failed to deliver on the promise of prosperity. Recycling the past may seem like a safe option, but it is a gamble that Malawi cannot afford to lose.
0 Comments