NEEF gives defaulters 60 days

Fund (Neef), which has now reverted to the Malawi Enterprise Development Fund (Medf) name, has given loan defaulters 60 days to settle their arrears or face consequences. Briefing the Parliamentary Committee on Commission, Statutory Corporations and State Enterprises in Lilongwe on Friday, chief executive officer Kayisi Sadala said Neef is struggling to recover loans, with recovery rate pegged at 52 percent, the lowest in history. He said: “We have placed an advert informing those yet to repay to do so within 60 days.

This is not a handout, the money belongs to Malawians and comes from taxpayers. “We are implementing a stringent recovery programme for those in default or with arrears, particularly for loans disbursed in 2025 where we have encountered numerous challenges.” Sadala said the total loan portfolio stands at K240 billion extended to 377 460 Malawians as of December 2025. From the amount, he said K116 billion was disbursed in 2025 alone and that most of the recovery challenges are linked to loans issued during the year.

He said some districts are recording repayment levels of as low as nine percent. Sadala also admitted that some loans intended to empower ordinary and under-served Malawians, including women, youth and persons with disabilities, ended up in the hands of Cabinet ministers and other politicians. He said at least 20 employees are currently facing disciplinary proceedings over the alleged mismanagement of funds in 2025.

[paywall]

Sadala said the absence of an Act of Parliament governing the institution has created room for frequent name changes, highlighting that the fund currently operates under a presidential decree, underscoring the need for legislation to guide its operations. He said the Neef board felt reverting to Medf name would restore the organisation’s original enterprise development mandate. Reacting to Sadala’s presentation, committee chairperson Sylvester Ayuba James attributed the institution’s long-standing challenges to external influence and faulted the continued rebranding as costly.

He recommended establishing the fund through an Act of Parliament to clearly prescribe its mandate. “We are talking about billions lost because due diligence was not properly conducted on certain beneficiaries who received substantial loans and farm inputs but have failed to repay. Those who allowed this to happen must be held accountable to prevent a recurrence,” said James. Meanwhile, Mzuzu University-based economist Christopher Mbukwa has described the name change as costly and unnecessary, particularly at a time when the government is implementing austerity measures.

[/paywall]