The Office of the Director of Public Officers Declaration is seeking an amendment of the assets declaration law to give it powers to prosecute public officers who fail to declare their assets or under-declare. Section 11(i) of the declarations law of 2013 requires the director to enforce listed public officers’ compliance by referring non-compliance to relevant employment authorities with recommendations for appropriate sanctions. But legal and anti-corruption advocates have said granting prosecutorial powers to the office would be misguided and risk fragmenting Malawi’s prosecution system since its strength lies in prevention, verification and investigation, not prosecution.
In a written response on Wednesday, the directorate’s spokesperson Tiyamike Phiri said the Public Officers’ (Declaration of Assets, Liabilities and Business Interests) Act is currently under review and they have suggested that the office should have prosecutorial powers. She said: “As a directorate, we have been recommending dismissal of some public officers who contravened this law before. We don’t investigate; we do not have prosecutorial powers.
We have proposed that in the review. “However, our mandate as per the current scheme of the law ends at making recommendations to relevant authorities to dismiss or fire those that have failed to file declarations without reasonable excuse.” Phiri said currently the directorate works closely with other law enforcement agencies when it detects false declarations, non-compliance, or signs of illicit enrichment. She said as part of Programmatic Verification, every year, the directorate samples some declarations which are subjected to verification, using whistle-blower and suspicious information such as over-declaration, or under-declaration.
[paywall]
Said Phiri: “Once a matter is referred to those bodies, we no longer control investigative timelines or evidentiary standards.” Private-practice lawyer Benedicto Kondowe expressed reservations about giving the directorate prosecutorial powers, saying that with the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) constitutionally mandated to prosecute and a National Prosecutorial Agency in the offing, giving a similar mandate to another agency would invite duplication and institutional conflict. He said it should not be about giving them prosecutorial powers, but rather a clear provision that grants the directorate powers to recommend to DPP for prosecution for non-compliance and falsification of information. National Anti-Corruption Alliance chairperson Michael Kaiyatsa called for strengthening the directorate’s independence to act without political interference, but also enhancing coordination with the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA), and Financial Intelligence Authority (FIA).
He said introducing parallel prosecutorial authority risks duplication, institutional conflict, and fragmentation of decision-making, adding that focus should be on strengthening coordination. Said Kaiyatsa: “Without strong enforcement mechanisms, lifestyle audit guidelines and real sanctions, the law, even once amended, could still become a symbolic gesture rather than a meaningful instrument of accountability.”
[/paywall]
