The political storm around the alleged visit of CCAP Nkhoma Synod ministers to former President Arthur Peter Mutharika’s (APM) Page House has taken a new twist. On the surface, the Synod’s official statement, dated April 15th, 2025, categorically distances itself from the visit, declaring that only six of its 267 ministers were involved—and that they acted in their personal capacity, not as official Synod representatives.
But the question is deeper than a press release: Was APM misled, or is Nkhoma Synod protecting its image?
APM: A Leader in the Dark?
At 85, APM remains a significant political figure, but some wonder whether he is still fully in control of the political processes around him. This wouldn’t be the first time he’s found himself distanced from decisions made in his name.
Take the TPIN scandal, where Norman Chisale allegedly used the former president’s taxpayer identification number without his knowledge. The incident suggested that APM, despite his former high office, was at times unaware of the inner workings of his own circle.
Sources close to the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) suggest that the visit was organized by clever political operators, possibly including figures like Alfred Gangata, known for his behind-the-scenes political maneuvering. If so, APM may have believed he was hosting official representatives of the Nkhoma Synod—lending the event more moral and spiritual weight than it truly had.
Or Is Nkhoma Synod Saving Face?
On the other hand, the Synod itself is not politically neutral. Historically aligned with the Malawi Congress Party (MCP), Nkhoma Synod has long been seen as a religious institution with political leanings.
Could the leadership now be scrambling to protect its image?
The strong language in the statement—calling the visit a “violation” and promising disciplinary action—raises eyebrows. Was the Synod genuinely unaware, or is it now cleaning up a political embarrassment? After all, openly associating with the DPP—especially in a time when elections loom—might damage its standing among loyal MCP supporters.
Or Was This a DPP Power Move?
There’s also a third possibility that can’t be ignored: Was this all deliberate? Could the DPP have orchestrated the visit to send a message to the ruling party—that it still has loyal voices even within MCP-dominated spaces like the Nkhoma Synod?
If so, it was a calculated show of strength. By giving the impression that the Synod was warming up to APM, the DPP may have sought to disrupt MCP’s religious support base and signal that the playing field is shifting.
So, What’s the Truth?
Was APM genuinely misled by those around him? Is the Synod backtracking to protect its image and political loyalties? Or is this a smart political chess move by the DPP to rattle MCP strongholds?
The truth may lie somewhere in between. But one thing is clear: religious institutions can no longer pretend to sit on the fence when their members participate in high-stakes political moves. And political leaders must be careful not to be used—or to use others—without full understanding of the consequences.
Malawi deserves transparency. Whether it’s from politicians, churches, or their strategists in the shadows, the people must demand honesty—not games.
0 Comments