Goodbye G-to-G! Govt Stops Fuel Deals Riddled with Secrecy, Suspicion and State Capture

Government has finally moved to dismantle the controversial Government-to-Government (G-to-G) fuel procurement system—an opaque and scandal-soaked framework that critics say opened the floodgates to corruption, state capture, and ministerial overreach.

The Ministry of Natural Resources, Energy and Mining has begun the process of reversing sweeping amendments to the Energy Regulation Act of 2004 and the Liquid Fuels and Gas (Production and Supply) Act of 2024, legislation that effectively handed unchecked power to the Minister of Energy. The laws, passed in December 2024 and signed by former president Lazarus Chakwera weeks later, became the backbone of the G-to-G system.

Ministry spokesperson Joan Thaundi confirmed that the reversal process has started, saying legal guidance has been sought from the Ministry of Justice following President Peter Mutharika’s announcement in Parliament that his administration would abandon the G-to-G arrangement and return to open tendering.

“We have written the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs for guidance following the President’s speech in Parliament where he mentioned that the country will be procuring fuel through the open tender system. But since G-to-G is law, it has to be reviewed,” Thaundi said.

The G-to-G framework—introduced in the middle of crippling fuel shortages—was sold to the nation as a silver bullet for efficiency. Instead, it concentrated procurement power in the hands of one minister, bypassing the Public Procurement and Disposal of Assets (PPDA) Act and stripping away essential oversight.

Parliament’s own legal voices sounded the alarm at the time.
DPP’s then spokesperson on legal affairs Bright Msaka and UDF’s Esther Jolobala warned that the amendments placed the Minister “above the law,” creating fertile ground for abuse and corruption.

The Chakwera administration pressed on regardless. Then energy minister Ibrahim Matola defended the reforms, arguing they would reduce costs by allowing direct procurement from refineries in Saudi Arabia, Oman and Bahrain—cutting out middlemen.

But behind the rhetoric, the cracks widened.

Governance expert Willy Kambwandira has now echoed long-standing concerns, saying the secrecy surrounding the G-to-G deals created the perfect environment for inflated contracts and illegal enrichment.

“These deals were often signed in secrecy, bypassing public scrutiny and oversight institutions like the PPDA. Such practices heighten risks of corruption, inflated costs and abuse of authority,” he said.

He added that reversing the laws—and the contracts anchored in them—is not only justified but urgent, warning that the G-to-G arrangement carried “widespread inefficiencies, allegations of misconduct and potential for State capture.”

“Continuing with the G-to-G deals exposes the country to long-term liabilities and grossly violates the principles of transparency and accountability,” he said, stressing that only a legislative reversal—not a presidential decree—can clean up the mess.

The Ministry of Justice remained tight-lipped when asked about its advice to Capital Hill, citing attorney–client confidentiality.

With the administration moving to unwind the contentious system, one chapter closes. But the looming question remains: how much did Malawi lose while the country was locked into a procurement model shrouded in secrecy and insulated from oversight?

As the government prepares to bury G-to-G, Malawians are left demanding more than a policy reversal—they want answers, accountability, and the truth behind the deals done in the dark.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :