DPP powers come under scrutiny

Increasing instances of discontinuation of high-profile criminal cases by the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) have stirred debate on the powers and limits of the office. Under Section 99(2e and 3) of the Constitution, the DPP has powers to discontinue any criminal proceedings at any stage before judgement and communicate reasons for the decision to the Legal Affairs Committee (LAC) of Parliament within 10 days for purposes of accountability. But in separate interviews with The Nation, legal, accountability and political pundits have observed that discontinuances appear to follow political cycles rather than legal merit.

This, they said, raise concerns about consistency, institutional autonomy and the appearance of external influence even if some decisions may be legally justified. In Criminal Case Number 3 of 2023, Minister of Energy and Mining Jean Mathanga was cleared alongside three others while in Criminal Cause Number 2 of 2025, Minister of Finance, Economic Planning and Decentralisation Joseph Mwanamvekha and five others were let off the hook. The DPP also discontinued Criminal Case Number 19 of 2023 involving current Reserve Bank of Malawi (RBM) Deputy Governor Henry Mathanga, former RBM governor Dalitso Kabambe and incumbent Secretary to the Treasury Cliff Chiunda.

The other case, Criminal Case Number 3 of 2025, involving Kabambe and Henry Mathanga, was also discontinued. In an interview yesterday, LAC chairperson Gilbert Khonyongwa confirmed that the reasons for the discontinuation of the cases in question were duly submitted to Parliament. “The Legal Affairs committee will, in due course, convene to consider the submissions and assess their adequacy.

[paywall]

Should it be deemed necessary, the committee will formally invite the Director of Public Prosecutions to appear before it for further clarification,” he said. Between 2023 and 2024, former DPP Masauko Chamkakala discontinued about 11 high-profile criminal cases after succeeding Steve Kayuni. The cases included the K1.7 billion corruption trial of former president Bakili Muluzi and K16.5 billion tax evasion case against Mapeto David Whitehead and Sons (DWS) Limited executives and two Malawi Revenue Authority (MRA) customs officers.

At the time, the LAC told Chamkakala to revive the forgery case involving Paramount Holdings Limited and its directors, but the DPP did not. Later, the Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal granted Luthando Holdings Limited, an interested party in the forgery case, permission to start judicial review proceedings in the Paramount Holdings case. In an interview yesterday, University of Malawi (Unima) law professor Garton Kamchedzera said the pattern shows that political power has made a mockery of professional and technical judgement on the part of certain members of the legal profession.

He said: “One hope is that the case may be brought back within the time specified in the order. The second hope is that a group or an organisation with sufficient interest can bring public interest litigation against the DPP.

[/paywall]