Legal Experts Slam and Shame AG Chakaka for Defending MPs’ Grip on CDF Funds
Attorney General Thabo Chakaka Nyirenda has found himself cornered, exposed, and embarrassingly out of depth following his decision to challenge the Constitutional Court’s landmark ruling on the exclusion of MPs from local councils and the administration of the Constituency Development Fund (CDF). Legal heavyweights have roundly condemned his move, branding it ill-advised, politically skewed, and legally incoherent.
In what appears to be an increasingly desperate attempt to shield political interests, Chakaka’s challenge is now being picked apart not only by the court of public opinion, but more significantly, by respected legal experts who understand the Constitution better than the AG seemingly does.
Prominent private practice lawyer John-Gift Mwakhwawa minced no words, stating that Chakaka’s accusations of “judicial overreach” are fundamentally misplaced. In a firm legal rebuke, Mwakhwawa defended the Constitutional Court’s powers, noting that it was well within its constitutional mandate to pronounce on related matters, even those not specifically pleaded.
“This is not a dispute in the traditional sense,” Mwakhwawa explained. “It is a request for constitutional clarity. When such a request lands before the court, and the court identifies issues deeply connected to the petition, it is entirely within its power to address them.”
Chakaka, who now stands embarrassingly alone in his interpretation, is being painted into a corner. His framing of the court’s actions as “procedural unfairness” has not only fallen flat, but is now being seen as a misguided attempt to cling to political control over public resources.
Even former Attorney General Charles Mhango, while acknowledging the need for courts to respect boundaries, delivered a subtle but damning caution: Chakaka must be careful not to appear as though he is taking sides in an internal government dispute. Mhango’s words, though diplomatically phrased, carry the weight of a seasoned legal mind: an AG who chooses partisanship over prudence risks damaging the credibility of the entire justice system.
In fact, Mhango reminded the nation of a precedent set by the same Constitutional Court during the historic 2020 presidential elections ruling, when the court introduced the 50%+1 requirement — a matter not raised by any party. That ruling was later upheld wholesale by the Supreme Court, thereby cementing the judiciary’s right to deal with constitutional questions as they emerge within the context of a petition.
Chakaka’s logic now lies in tatters. He is suggesting, incredibly, that the CDF cannot run without MPs — an argument that smacks of institutional capture and a desire to politicize developmental resources. For a man tasked with being the government’s chief legal adviser, Chakaka has instead become the face of defensive politicking, scrambling to preserve an outdated, conflict-ridden system where oversight and implementation roles dangerously blur.
While the Malawi Local Government Association (Malga) — the very institution that triggered the case — is preparing to defend the court’s decision with confidence, it is Chakaka who appears isolated, increasingly outmatched, and tone-deaf to the constitutional direction the country is taking.
In the end, what Chakaka calls “judicial overreach” may actually be judicial courage — and his pushback, nothing more than an embarrassing stumble in the face of progress.
The question now is: Will Chakaka retreat with dignity, or continue to dig deeper into a hole of legal humiliation?
Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :
