Why Should Malawians Keep Trusting DoDMA? New Disaster Appeal Reopens Missing Accountability Questions Over Billions in Relief Funds

Malawi's Department of Disaster Management Affairs (DoDMA) faces renewed scrutiny over the accountability of billions of Kwacha in disaster relief funds, following its latest appeal for support to repatriate citizens. This recurring issue highlights systemic weaknesses in public finance management and oversight within the country's disaster response framework. Despite the existence of robust legal instruments like the Public Finance Management Act, the Disaster Risk Management Act, and the Corrupt Practices Act, persistent allegations of mismanagement and a lack of transparent expenditure reporting undermine public trust and donor confidence. This article examines the legal and institutional landscape governing disaster funds in Malawi, analyzes the accountability gaps, and discusses the implications for legal practitioners and the broader governance agenda.

The Department of Disaster Management Affairs (DoDMA) in Malawi has once again issued an appeal for financial and logistical assistance, this time to facilitate the repatriation of Malawians stranded in South Africa. This latest call for aid, however, has reignited a persistent and uncomfortable question that has plagued the department for years: what happens to the substantial funds mobilised in the wake of national disasters? Over the years, millions, and in some instances billions, of Kwacha have been contributed by the government, development partners, the private sector, and ordinary citizens for various emergencies, including cyclones, floods, and health crises.

Despite these significant contributions, a critical 'visibility gap' exists, where the public and donors witness funds entering the system but lack clear, consolidated, and publicly accessible expenditure reports detailing their utilisation. This enduring lack of transparency has eroded public trust and raised serious concerns about accountability within DoDMA's operations. The current appeal serves as a stark reminder of the urgent need to address these systemic issues, which not only undermine the effectiveness of disaster response but also impact Malawi's broader governance and anti-corruption efforts.

This article delves into the legal framework governing public finance and disaster management in Malawi, examining the statutory provisions intended to ensure accountability. It will analyse the practical challenges and gaps that contribute to the persistent allegations of mismanagement, drawing on relevant case law and audit findings. Finally, it will conclude by outlining the implications for legal practitioners and suggesting pathways for strengthening accountability mechanisms to restore confidence in Malawi’s disaster management efforts.

The legal framework for disaster management in Malawi has recently undergone significant reform. Historically, disaster preparedness and relief efforts were governed by the Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act (Cap. 33:05) of 1991, which established DoDMA, the National Disaster Preparedness and Relief Committee, and the National Disaster Preparedness and Relief Fund. This Act primarily focused on response mechanisms. However, recognising the need for a more comprehensive approach, the Disaster Risk Management Act 2023 was enacted, repealing the 1991 Act. The new Act provides a holistic legal framework for disaster risk management, with an increased focus on building community resilience and establishing a dedicated Disaster Risk Management Trust Fund.

Complementing the disaster-specific legislation are broader public finance management and anti-corruption laws. The Public Finance Management Act, 2022 (Act No. 4 of 2022), sets out the legal and institutional framework for managing public finances, emphasising transparency, accountability, and responsible management of public resources. It delineates the responsibilities of controlling officers, the Treasury, and the Accountant General in the management of public funds and assets. Oversight is further provided by the Public Audit Act (Chapter 37:01), which establishes the Office of the Auditor General, mandated to audit and report on the public accounts of Malawi to the National Assembly. The Corrupt Practices Act (Cap. 7:04) of 1995, which established the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), provides the legal basis for investigating and prosecuting corrupt practices in both public and private bodies.

Despite this seemingly robust legal architecture, Malawi has a history of significant public finance mismanagement scandals, such as the infamous “Cashgate” scandal in 2013, which involved the misappropriation of government funds through manipulated payment systems. More recently, an investigative audit into the usage of COVID-19 funds in 2020-2021 revealed widespread irregularities, including unprocedural procurement, irregular allowances, and unaccounted-for expenditures, with DoDMA explicitly mentioned for issues like un-deposited cash and payments to non-existent employees. These historical and recent instances underscore a persistent challenge in translating legal provisions into effective practical accountability.

The recurring questions surrounding DoDMA's financial accountability highlight critical gaps in the implementation and enforcement of Malawi's public finance and anti-corruption laws. While the Public Finance Management Act, 2022, clearly outlines the responsibilities of controlling officers in managing public funds and assets, and mandates robust accounting procedures and reporting requirements, the consistent failure to produce consolidated, publicly audited expenditure reports for disaster relief funds suggests a systemic breakdown in adherence to these statutory duties. The Act aims to strengthen transparency and accountability, yet the 'visibility gap' identified by critics indicates that the mechanisms for tracking funds from receipt to final disbursement are either inadequate or not rigorously applied, particularly in emergency contexts.

The role of oversight institutions, such as the National Audit Office (NAO) and the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), is crucial but often faces challenges. The Auditor General is empowered by the Public Audit Act to audit government accounts and report findings to Parliament, providing an essential check on public expenditure. Indeed, recent reports by the Auditor General have uncovered extensive financial irregularities across various government ministries, departments, and agencies, amounting to over K158 billion for the financial year ending March 31, 2024, with a concerning pattern of institutions failing to provide supporting documentation. While these audits are vital, the subsequent prosecution and recovery of misappropriated funds often lag, as evidenced by the slow progress in court cases related to COVID-19 fund misuse.

Furthermore, the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act (Act No. 7 of 2025), which replaced the 2017 Act, aims to regulate, monitor, and oversee public procurement and disposal of assets, promoting transparency and efficiency. However, past audits, including those related to COVID-19 funds, have frequently cited unprocedural procurement and inflated prices, indicating that the principles of value for money and fair process are often compromised during emergency procurements. The new Disaster Risk Management Act 2023, with its provision for a Disaster Risk Management Trust Fund, presents an opportunity to embed stronger accountability mechanisms from its inception, including clear guidelines for fund management, reporting, and auditing. However, the effectiveness of this new framework will depend entirely on rigorous implementation and political will to enforce its provisions.

The persistent allegations of mismanagement not only undermine public confidence but also expose government officials to potential legal liabilities under the Corrupt Practices Act, which criminalises various forms of corruption, including abuse of office and fraudulent acquisition of public property. The lack of clear accountability also deters international donors, who increasingly demand robust oversight and transparent reporting for their contributions. The recent discontinuance of high-profile corruption cases against senior officials, as reported in February 2026, further complicates the perception of justice and accountability within the Malawian legal system, potentially emboldening those inclined towards malfeasance. This environment necessitates a more proactive and assertive stance from legal and oversight bodies to ensure that the legal framework is not merely ornamental but serves its intended purpose of safeguarding public resources.

The ongoing appeals for disaster relief by DoDMA, juxtaposed with persistent allegations of financial mismanagement, present a critical challenge to Malawi's governance and legal institutions. While a comprehensive legal framework exists, including the Public Finance Management Act, the new Disaster Risk Management Act 2023, and the Corrupt Practices Act, the consistent failure to provide transparent and consolidated expenditure reports for billions in relief funds indicates a significant disconnect between statutory provisions and practical implementation. This erosion of accountability undermines public trust, jeopardises future donor support, and ultimately compromises the nation's ability to effectively respond to crises.

For legal practitioners, these issues underscore the importance of advising both public and private sector clients on stringent compliance with public finance and procurement laws, particularly in emergency contexts. Lawyers involved in public interest litigation may find fertile ground in advocating for greater transparency and accountability, potentially pursuing actions for the recovery of mismanaged funds or advocating for stronger enforcement mechanisms. Moving forward, it is imperative for Malawi to not only strengthen its legal frameworks but, more critically, to ensure their rigorous enforcement. This requires bolstering the independence and capacity of oversight bodies like the National Audit Office and the Anti-Corruption Bureau, fostering a culture of integrity within public service, and demanding unwavering political will to prosecute and penalise those who misuse public resources. Only through such concerted efforts can Malawians truly trust that their contributions to disaster relief are managed with integrity and serve their intended purpose.