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) is facing renewed scrutiny over its financial accountability following a fresh appeal for funds to repatriate citizens. This comes amidst persistent questions regarding the transparent management of billions of Kwacha in past disaster relief donations. Despite a comprehensive legal and institutional framework designed to ensure public finance probity, including the Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act, Public Finance Management Act, and the oversight mandates of the National Audit Office and Anti-Corruption Bureau, significant gaps in enforcement and public reporting have eroded trust. This article examines the legal landscape and highlights the critical need for enhanced transparency and accountability mechanisms to restore public and donor confidence in disaster fund management.

The Department of Disaster Management Affairs (DoDMA) in Malawi has recently issued an appeal for financial and logistical support to facilitate the repatriation of Malawians stranded in South Africa. This latest call for assistance, however, has reignited a long-standing and uncomfortable question among the public and donor community: what truly happens to the substantial funds and resources donated for disaster relief after they are received?

Over the years, Malawi has mobilised significant sums, often billions of Kwacha, from government allocations, the private sector, and individual citizens in response to numerous national disasters, including cyclones, floods, and public health emergencies like COVID-19. Yet, a consistent and publicly accessible consolidated expenditure report detailing the utilisation of these funds, from receipt to final disbursement, remains conspicuously absent. This lack of transparency has fostered a climate of distrust, prompting a critical re-evaluation of the accountability mechanisms within Malawi's disaster management framework. This article aims to dissect the legal and regulatory architecture governing disaster relief funds in Malawi, expose the persistent challenges in ensuring transparency and accountability, and underscore the urgent need for robust reforms to safeguard public trust and ensure effective disaster response.

The legal and institutional framework for disaster management and public finance in Malawi is ostensibly comprehensive. DoDMA operates under the mandate of the Disaster Preparedness and Relief Act (Chapter 33:05), which establishes its role in coordinating and implementing measures for disaster preparedness, relief, and mitigation. Crucially, this Act also provides for the establishment of the National Disaster Preparedness and Relief Fund, intended to serve as a repository for financial resources during emergencies.

Underpinning all public financial operations is the Public Finance Management Act, 2022 (No. 4 of 2022), which sets out the legal and institutional framework for public finance management, emphasizing transparency, accountability, and the responsible stewardship of public resources. Complementing this, the Public Audit Act (Chapter 37:01) establishes the Office of the Auditor General and the National Audit Office, empowering them to audit government ministries, agencies, statutory bodies, and projects funded by public funds to ensure accountability. The Public Accounts Committee of the National Assembly is further tasked with scrutinising public expenditures.

Furthermore, the fight against corruption is spearheaded by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), established under the Corrupt Practices Act (No. 18 of 1995). The ACB is mandated to prevent, investigate, and prosecute corrupt practices in both public and private sectors. Public procurement, a critical area for expenditure of disaster funds, is regulated by the Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act (2017), with a new Act coming into force in 2025, aiming to enhance transparency and curb malpractices. These legislative instruments collectively form a robust legal architecture designed to ensure that public funds, including those for disaster relief, are managed with integrity and transparency.

Despite the seemingly robust legal and institutional framework, Malawi has consistently grappled with significant accountability deficits in the management of disaster relief funds. The current appeal by DoDMA has brought to the fore a recurring concern: the absence of a single, publicly accessible, and itemised expenditure report for the billions of Kwacha mobilised during previous emergencies. This lack of detailed reporting extends to recent responses, including the MK1.8 billion in cash and in-kind support for the lean season emergency, where public announcements of donations were prominent, but audited expenditure reports remain elusive.

Past audits and investigations have revealed glaring instances of mismanagement and corruption. A 2021 investigative audit into the utilisation of COVID-19 funds, for example, uncovered that K11.7 million cashed out by DoDMA accounts personnel was not redeposited into the department's bank account, and over K3 million was paid to non-existent employees, or “ghost officers.” The audit further identified that approximately K720 million (around $915,000) was spent irregularly or remained unaccounted for in the overall COVID-19 response, with a notable lack of sufficient oversight from DoDMA and the Presidential Task Force. Similarly, the Office of the Ombudsman reported a lack of transparency and misuse of COVID-19 funds, highlighting issues where funds collected through DoDMA, amounting to USD 14.4 million, were sometimes improperly transferred. These findings are not isolated, with reports also indicating corruption and mismanagement of foreign aid intended for victims of Tropical Cyclone Freddy.

The core issue lies not necessarily in the absence of laws, but in persistent enforcement gaps and systemic weaknesses. While the Public Finance Management Act, 2022, mandates the Secretary to the Treasury to coordinate and account for donations and grants, the practical implementation of transparent reporting for disaster funds by DoDMA has been consistently weak. The National Audit Office, empowered by the Public Audit Act, frequently uncovers irregularities in its reports, but the subsequent follow-up, prosecution, and recovery of misappropriated funds often face delays or prove ineffective. Critically, while the Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor General can recommend actions, they lack direct judicial powers to enforce accountability.

Furthermore, structural weaknesses, such as a lack of clear guidance on fund allocation and insufficient internal control measures, have been identified as contributing factors to misallocation, fraud, and corruption. The Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act aims to ensure transparency in procurement, yet procurement-related malpractices remain a significant concern in the expenditure of public funds. This repeated cycle of appeals for funds without corresponding detailed and publicly verifiable accountability reports has severely eroded public and donor confidence, shifting the focus from willingness to assist to a demand for demonstrable integrity in fund management.

Malawi's legal and institutional framework for public finance and disaster management is robust on paper, providing a clear mandate for transparency and accountability. However, the recurring questions surrounding DoDMA's management of disaster relief funds underscore a critical disconnect between legal provisions and practical enforcement. The consistent failure to provide detailed, publicly accessible expenditure reports for billions in donated funds has fostered deep public and donor distrust, jeopardising future humanitarian efforts and undermining the very purpose of disaster relief.

For legal practitioners, these persistent issues present several implications. Donors, both domestic and international, should enhance their due diligence by insisting on stringent reporting frameworks, including the establishment of single, disaster-specific fund accounts, itemised expenditure reports, independent post-disaster audits, and public disclosure of all procurement and logistics contracts. Legal professionals can also play a crucial role in advocating for and pursuing public interest litigation to compel greater transparency and accountability from public institutions. For the Malawian government, there is an urgent need to operationalise existing laws, strengthen internal controls within DoDMA, and empower oversight bodies like the Anti-Corruption Bureau and the National Audit Office with greater enforcement capabilities. Moving forward, all stakeholders must demand and implement a culture of unwavering transparency and accountability to rebuild trust and ensure that every Kwacha donated for disaster relief genuinely serves its intended purpose. The ongoing efforts by Parliament to strengthen oversight through performance and lifestyle auditing, alongside the implementation of the new Public Procurement and Disposal of Public Assets Act 2025, will be crucial developments to monitor in this critical pursuit of good governance.