Members of Parliament are once again at the centre of controversy after secretly pushing a new constitutional amendment that would return control of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF) to themselves--barely six months after a landmark High Court ruling stripped them of that power. The move, described by governance experts as a "brazen act of constitutional vandalism," has angered councils, civil society, and legal analysts, and has triggered an immediate legal threat from the Malawi Local Government Association (MALGA).
The new Constitution (Amendment) Bill of 2025, gazetted on 21 November, proposes inserting an entirely new Chapter XIVA into the Constitution. This chapter would formally establish the CDF and--more controversially--place its governance directly in the hands of MPs, empowering them to manage, direct, and control the Fund through a future Act of Parliament. A key clause states plainly: "members of Parliament shall be responsible for the governance of the Fund."
This proposal directly clashes with the May 2025 High Court ruling, in which a three-judge panel declared MPs' involvement in CDF unconstitutional, unlawful, and a threat to decentralisation. The ruling was a clear warning that MPs cannot be both lawmakers and implementers of development funds--a dual role the court argued violated separation of powers and undermined local governance.
Keep up with the latest headlines on WhatsApp | LinkedIn
Yet, despite this clear guidance, MPs are now attempting to rewrite the Constitution itself to restore their control. The timing has raised deep suspicion among analysts, who view the manoeuvre as a pre-2025 election strategy to tighten political patronage networks and reclaim a powerful tool for buying voter loyalty with public funds.
MALGA, whose petition led to the historic ruling in May, has responded furiously. In a statement signed by executive director Hadrod Zeru Mkandawire, the association describes the new bill as "an outright betrayal of the trust Malawians placed in their Parliamentarians," accusing MPs of ignoring judicial authority, decentralisation principles, and the rule of law. MALGA says it will immediately challenge the bill in court if Parliament attempts to pass it.
The association warns that the proposed amendment would effectively overturn the High Court judgment, re-politicise development funds, and weaken councils that are already struggling with fiscal centralisation and limited autonomy. According to MALGA, the bill insults the very architecture of Malawi's Constitution, which is designed to restrain political overreach and protect local governance from central government interference.
The National Advocacy Platform (NAP) has also condemned Parliament's plot, urging Malawians to reject what it calls an "affront to the Constitution, an insult to the Malawian people, and a blatant reversal of democratic gains." NAP has called for nationwide civic action--including peaceful assembly at Parliament--should MPs attempt to bulldoze the amendment through.
Governance and public policy experts warn that the bill, if passed, could destabilise Malawi's decentralised system and create a parallel power structure where MPs override councils. Transparency International policy analyst Nicholas Mwisama says the manoeuvre reflects "short-term electoral interests" and could deepen patronage, reduce accountability, and potentially trigger a Supreme Court showdown. While acknowledging that constitutional entrenchment of CDF could improve long-term stability of the fund, he stresses that this only makes sense if governance remains with councils--not MPs.
Mwisama further warns that assigning control of CDF to MPs rewrites the logic of decentralised development. CDF funds originate from national appropriations and are meant to be devolved resources managed by councils who create district development plans. Allowing MPs to take over, he says, risks creating "parallel structures of development" that clash with existing local authority systems, undermine planning, and produce fragmented projects driven by political motives rather than community needs.
The controversy has reignited the debate over the true purpose of CDF. Supporters of the court ruling say MPs abused the fund for years--handpicking contractors, demanding kickbacks, and using projects as campaign tools instead of empowering councils and communities. The court's decision in May sought to restore professionalism, transparency, and accountability by placing management of CDF where the Constitution intended: under local government authorities.
Yet Parliament's latest attempt to rewrite the Constitution signals a fierce resistance to losing that power. Observers say this is not just about development management--it is about political control, influence, and the leverage MPs gain when they can distribute public resources directly to voters.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
The bill's emergence also raises serious questions about Parliament's respect for judicial independence. Critics fear that if MPs succeed here, it will embolden future attempts to dilute court decisions that inconvenience political elites. As NAP warns, the crisis is no longer only about CDF but about safeguarding constitutionalism, limiting abuse of power, and preventing "political self-gratification dressed as reform."
With tensions rising, MALGA is preparing its legal response, and civil society groups are mobilising to block what they view as a dangerous step backward. The battle over who controls CDF--MPs or councils--is shaping up to be one of the most defining governance fights Malawi has seen since the return to multiparty democracy.
At stake is not just a development fund but the very integrity of Malawi's constitutional order.
