Malawi’s Constitutional Court Strikes Down Criminal Defamation Law in Landmark Ruling
The High Court of Malawi, sitting as a Constitutional Court, has delivered a historic judgment declaring section 200 of the Penal Code—Malawi’s criminal defamation law—unconstitutional, in a case brought by political activist Joshua Chisa Mbele.
In a unanimous ruling delivered in July 2025, Justices Kachale, Mwale, and Mvula held that the provision unjustifiably infringed on the right to freedom of expression, enshrined under section 35 of the Constitution, and was incompatible with Malawi’s obligations under regional and international human rights law.
The court stated that while protecting reputation and dignity is a legitimate aim, criminalising defamation was neither necessary nor proportionate, particularly in a democratic society. It pointed out that civil remedies—such as lawsuits for damages—are a less restrictive and more appropriate response to reputational harm.
“The threat of imprisonment under section 200 has a chilling effect on public discourse and democratic participation,” the Court noted, adding that the broad wording of the law made it susceptible to abuse and arbitrary enforcement.
The case stemmed from pending criminal proceedings against Mbele, who had been charged with defamation over alleged remarks about a public official. He challenged the constitutionality of the law, arguing that it stifled legitimate criticism and dissent.
In its judgment, the Court drew from comparative jurisprudence across Africa and other Commonwealth countries, where courts have increasingly favoured decriminalisation of defamation. The ruling signals Malawi’s alignment with evolving human rights standards that prioritise open dialogue over punitive speech controls.
The Court ordered that section 200 be struck down with immediate effect, meaning no further prosecutions can be initiated under the provision. Each party was ordered to bear its own legal costs.
Legal analysts have hailed the decision as a victory for free speech and democratic accountability, warning, however, that the state must remain vigilant in using civil laws responsibly and not seek to reintroduce criminal penalties through other means.
For many in Malawi’s civic space, this judgment represents a turning point in the protection of constitutional liberties and a message to the state: speech must not be policed with prison bars.